MediaWiki - User contributions [en]

Talk:Rumble (G1)

2026-01-16T19:12:30Z

Ryangut: spotted a mistake

Not another FIRRIB war. SIGH....-Jetfire200000
:First, new comments go at the bottom, not the top.
:Second, I see no war. --[[User:Andrusi|Andrusi]] 22:31, 6 June 2011 (EDT)

Shouldn't this page just be 'Rumble'? - [[User:RolonBolon|RolonBolon]] 17:40, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I think so, the only other Rumble I can think of is from GF.

On a similar note, how do we want to explain the fact that in the Japanese dub, Frenzy was the blue cassette? I think a "However, in the Japanese dub, all of this was done by Frenzy" would be the easyest. --[[User:FortMax|FortMax]] 18:20, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

==Smallest Decpeticon?==

Quite possibly. I remember one episode where he fought Spike. They were the same size, and Spike was actually able to push him around a bit, though Rumble, being machine, ultimately prevailed. But then there was another episode where Rumble was about double Spike's size.[[User:71.34.68.213|71.34.68.213]] 22:02, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

: Haha, [[scale]]! But seriously, he was indeed pretty consistently depicted as the smallest robot-mode Decepticon on the show, although Laserbeak or Ravage might have been smaller. He's probably not the smallest Decepticon ''ever'', though--that honor would presumably belong to one of the Micromasters, or maybe one of the weird merchandise-only characters like Enemy. --[[User:Andrusi|Andrusi]] 23:16, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

==Italian name(s)==
Uh... hrm. The Italian wiki page lists Rumble as ''Tartar'' and Frenzy as ''Scarlet (Tremor)'', with a note saying Frenzy/Tremor appeared in the live action movie. Meanwhile, an Italian article on the Movie compares Frenzy with his G1 counterpart, shows a screenshot of the blue robot, and identifies it as Tremor/Frenzy. The TF wiki currently lists Rumble as Tremor and Frenzy as Tartar.

Offhand, I can't find anything that says Rumble and Frenzy were actually sold in Italy. Given the evidence... I guess... the blue robot on the show was Tremor, but the Italians consider the blue robot to have been Frenzy? I am so confused. --[[User:Monzo|Monzo]] 23:44, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

==Universe Bio==
These guys had bios? And wouldn't this make him explicitly the G1 character? [[User:Chip|Chip]] 06:02, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
:They were provided online for the guy who managed the class, and explicitly placed in the Universe storyline. [[User:Interrobang|Interrobang]] 03:56, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

==G1/Universe merge?==
Since we're merging all of the slightly different Universe characters, does this one count? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 03:50, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
:I'd say so. The specific G2 Frenzy reference clinches it for me. Are all these "unofficial" bios still online? I've Googled around a bit but haven't found anything. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 04:02, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
::[[Talk:Overkill (G1)|Overkill's]]. I can't find the other two. They're lost in two years of posts. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 04:41, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

==Rumble/Frenzy color switch==
Without reopening that whole can of worms, I noticed that the G1 cartoon bible only lists Rumble and not Frenzy. Could the mixed up colors have been a result of only using Rumble in the beginning? It looks like an attempt to advertise both toys but only animate one. Frenzy doesn't show up until near the end of the first season and given that they were using plenty of generics, it looks like a conscious descision to exclude him initially. Has anyone ever heard anything about this?
:I do believe they cartoon had an official policy to avoid using Buzzsaw, as he was included with Soundwave who was already being advertised with his prominent role. I've never heard anything about the other cassettes, but as they were all sold in two packs it's possible they didn't need to "advertise" all four of them. - [[User:Cattleprod|Cattleprod]] 15:36, 27 July 2009 (EDT)

== Headmasters voice actor help! ==

A little help from the literate! Rumble's Headmasters voice actor is:

[[Image:Hmrumbleactor.jpg]]

This is from his only speaking role in Headmasters. What's absolutely and completely ''fascinating'', however, is that this is the BLUE ROBOT - and he's ''actually credited as Rumble'', not Frenzy! - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 16:20, 15 November 2009 (EST)
: I know this is a decade late, but... that says Lambor (ランボル, AKA Sideswipe), not Rumble (ランブル). Is Hirohiko Kakegawa listed as Rumble somewhere else in the credits, or are we basing that whole note on a misreading? ...Actually, I see we don't even list Sideswipe as being in the episode this apparently came from, so maybe it ''is'' Rumble, but with a typo? Maybe someone who owns the series should double check that... -[[User:Ookalf|Ookalf]] ([[User talk:Ookalf|talk]]) 22:26, 10 May 2020 (EDT)

== Featured article for December? ==

If we can get the Dreamwave GI Joe cossover filled in, I think this page is approaching featured article quality.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 22:05, 15 November 2009 (EST)
:My thoughts are two-fold here:

1. I think we should stick with Movie/ROTF guys as the featured through the holidays (It's what's big right now after all and can only help with Google-juice. - Maybe [[Sideways (ROTF)]]?

2. It seems ''none'' the Featured Articles so far have been an episode or comic story, and I believe that [[Target: 2006]] has enough in it to be a featured article soon.

So my vote for the next 3 FAs would be:
* I. [[Sideways (ROTF)]]
* II. [[Target: 2006]]
* III. [[Rumble (G1)|Rumble]]

But I'm just a lowly, fairly new-to-the-wiki editor and have no actual say. Also [[FIRRIB|FIBRIR]] -- [[User:G1MarvelBlaster|G1MarvelBlaster]] 10:23, 16 November 2009 (EST)

== Uh? ==

Why did his new (US) toy go from coming soon to cancelled? The image looks like the guy who photographed it, who is Chris McFeely, stole the stock photography and put it against a white background! And on top of that, the thing about the toy go and says it was already released!! Argh! I hate the quality of this wiki, but then again, we ''are'' dumb, foolish mortals. --[[User:Kaon Prisoner|Kaon Prisoner]] 22:14, 6 June 2011 (EDT)

And I didn't mean what I said about us being dumb, foolish mortals, as an insult. --[[User:Kaon Prisoner|Kaon Prisoner]] 22:16, 6 June 2011 (EDT)

:It's listed as canceled because its cancelled. And you can't steal stock photography its put out specifically for public use. If Chris cleaned it up thats good. The toy was released in Japan and canceled in the US. This is not a problem with the wiki, but apparently with your reading comprehension.--[[Special:Contributions/76.28.76.206|76.28.76.206]] 22:19, 6 June 2011 (EDT)

I'm kinda reluctant to say this, but, uh, you'd fix the info of Demolition Rumble, [[wikipedia:National Treasure: Book of Secrets|or it could just be me!]]

All done! --[[Special:Contributions/66.82.162.14|66.82.162.14]] 18:13, 23 August 2011 (EDT)

== A thought ==

Just a thought, why is his primary picture red? I feel its a bit confusing considering someone else we know is red.{{unsigned|Rock76222}}
:Because he was red and black before he was blue and purple, and isn't always blue and purple. The G1 cartoon is not the end-all, be-all, absolute truth version of Transformers. His first appearance (his 1984 toy) had him black and red, and so did his second appearance (the Marvel G1 comics). The cartoon came third and switched his and Frenzy's colors around for some unknown reason, thus leading to [[FIRRIB|this]] (click, read, and be merry). Also, please sign your comments. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] 02:00, 23 August 2013 (EDT)
: You're [[FIRRIB|outvoted]] by the sheer weight of canon. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 02:09, 23 August 2013 (EDT)

== Repurposing ==
So, uh, please don't yell at me for suggesting this, but should the original Frenzy toy be listed on this page as a repurposing (and the G1 Rumble on Frenzy's page)? Maybe not with the standard "repurposed" note, but something more along the lines of:
{{note|The [[The Transformers (cartoon)|Generation 1 cartoon]] used the colors of Frenzy's toy for Rumble and vice versa, and so it is listed here as a repurposing.}}
You could probably make the argument for the Masterpiece Frenzy too, but I feel like that's a different situation, despite being closer to cartoon-model Rumble. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 13:02, 10 September 2015 (EDT)
:But what about later toys, like the Masterpiece Rumble and Frenzy? The same argument could be made about them. A quick note at the top of the toy section redirecting people over to Rumble/Frenzy's page would be better than listing each others' toys on their respective pages. (If we feel it's absolutely necessary to do so, that is.) Or maybe even just a slight modification of the "This mold was also used to make Frenzy and Enemy." line at the end of their toy descriptions. "This toy was also used to make Frenzy and Enemy. Due to an animation error in the cartoon, that has since been purposefully imitated, this toy could also be considered to represent Frenzy, whereas Frenzy's toy could be considered to represent Rumble." Something like that, I dunno. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:33, 10 September 2015 (EDT)
::Agree with Ascendron. A quick note at the beginning of the toy section is the most that is needed. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 20:24, 10 September 2015 (EDT)
:::Alright, how about something like:
:::{{note|The [[The Transformers (cartoon)|Generation 1 cartoon]] used the colors of Frenzy's toy for Rumble and vice versa. Because of this, toys of Frenzy could be considered to represent Rumble instead. For those toys, see [[Frenzy (G1)#toys]].}}
:::at the top of the toy section - does that work? --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 07:40, 11 September 2015 (EDT)
::::I'd wait a day or so to see if anyone objects, but it seems fine to me. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 08:04, 11 September 2015 (EDT)
:::::I don't see why the currently-already-existing bit about this in the Notes isn't sufficient already. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 08:29, 11 September 2015 (EDT)
::::::I guess. I just thought that having a mention in the Toys section would be a) clearer and b) more in line with how the wiki treats similar repurposings, but it's not a big deal. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 09:07, 11 September 2015 (EDT)
:::::::I also don't think FIRRIB is really repurposing, either. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 11:14, 11 September 2015 (EDT)
::::::::Why not? It's the use of the design of one toy for a character it wasn't sold as, which is how official repurposings are defined. Isn't it? I dunno, you're the admin here. How would you define a repurposing? --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 11:35, 11 September 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::I don't think anyone at Sunbow took a look at the two tape toys and though, "Hey, let's use this one's colors, but purpler, instead!" I feel like there has to be intent behind repurposing. It'd be like saying the swapped-named Downshift and Cliffjumper in Transformers Energon was repurposing. It's just a production error. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 14:21, 11 September 2015 (EDT)

== Spotted an editorial mistake ==

In the Marvel comic section two stories have been placed in a completely random wrong place i.e. 'To a Power Unknown' and 'Missing in Action'. You have already stated on the 'Missing in Action' page "further validating the idea that the story cannot possibly be part of UK continuity." So these are in the wrong section. I hope someone will correct this.--[[User:Ryangut|Ryangut]] ([[User talk:Ryangut|talk]]) 14:12, 16 January 2026 (EST)

User talk:Ryangut

2024-04-27T09:42:43Z

Ryangut: latest reply to Please don't spam your fandom page */

== Macdonald Purnell storeis ==

Thank you for your work on the Macdonald Purnell books. I have done a lot of work on the various coloring and activity book pages in the past, but had never had access to these books (either physically or digitally) so I am glad that someone has found something more about them. These sorts of things get overlooked by most fans.--[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 09:16, 9 March 2019 (EST)

Thanks Khajidha, I am also glad this info is finally online. I only knew about this book because years ago a fan lent me it. I bought it myself this year.
He also lent me Action Frieze. I seem to recall it had Ultra Magnus and Galvatron.
I have mapped the entire transformers multiverse. Please see here. Its a system that shows how to view all the transformers stories. i.e reading orders.

https://transfanon.fandom.com/wiki/Transformers_Multiverse

hope you find it useful.

--[[User:Ryangut|Ryangut]] ([[User talk:Ryangut|talk]]) 13:03, 12 March 2019 (EDT)

== Please don't spam your fandom page ==

There is no need to add your website to several talk pages. Having it on your user page is fine.

Please sign your comments on talk pages.

Also, saying "there's a multiverse" does not explain the presence of contradictory events within a continuity. [[User:Prime Radiant|Prime Radiant]] ([[User talk:Prime Radiant|talk]]) 15:57, 15 October 2020 (EDT)
{{nofanficplz}}

Hi, I had forgotten I already had it on my user page. Thanks. Is it ok to say where the story can take place and say the complete list can be found in my user page? E.g. 'Hunted' and 'Plague of the Insecticons' can take place in the original future timeline. 'Prime's Rib' can take place in 1995 of the main timeline-British/German version. Saying they can't fit is wrong. No complex continuity is perfect when it comes to comics. the presence of contradictory events within a continuity shouldn't be surprising .e.g. different writers contradicting each other. (Its not my website just my article. sorry I forgot to sign). I have also done reading orders on other websites. no problems.--[[User:Ryangut|Ryangut]] ([[User talk:Ryangut|talk]]) 16:24, 16 October 2020 (EDT)
:Seriously, please stop "fixing" continuity notes. Everything you've posted is speculation based on your own timeline theories and does not have actual fiction or authorial statements to support them. Having a fanon interpretation is totally fine, but please keep it off the articles. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 20:07, 10 February 2021 (EST)

Okay, for real, everyone is tired of you trying to "fix" continuity errors based on your own headcanons. Knock it off, or you'll find yourself blocked from editing. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 20:56, 26 April 2024 (EDT)

Hi, its okay, I gave up trying to "fix" continuity on your website a long time ago so won't be bothering you again. However I thought that I can still express my opinions based on what I have read. I thought talk pages is where you can express opinions. You can on the Marvel wikia. I do have my own continuity article on another website (fandom page). I do tinker with it sometimes when I have overlooked something. I have actually made changes to it to reflect what you guys have been saying.

There is no official order that I am aware off that explains where timelines diverge and where certain stories fit into those timelines. (some dates are dubious). Your website has been invaluable for doing my own article.[[User:Ryangut|Ryangut]] ([[User talk:Ryangut|talk]]) 05:42, 27 April 2024 (EDT)

Talk:Lio Convoy in Imminent Danger!

2024-03-31T11:17:48Z

Ryangut: where this story fits

Were thbey called 'Matrices of Leadership'? I know A convoy gets a matrixcx upon achieving the rank of Hyperconvoy, but was this actual term ever used? Proper-noun-like? -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 22:12, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Not really, but in the Japanese language there is no such thing as plurals. "Matrices" is the plural for "Matrix", right? So I was trying to go with proper English. I *want* to write an article for the Japanese Beast Wars era Matrix system, but we can't settle on what to call it. They were called "Matrix of Leadership", but since they weren't THE Matrix of Leadership, the admins don't want that info in the Matrix of Leadership article. So what should I call it? --[[User:DrSpengler|DrSpengler]] 22:18, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

They're a [[Leadership Matrix]]. ; ) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 23:47, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

You win this round. --[[User:DrSpengler|DrSpengler]] 00:44, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

==RUN, you fools!==
It's "run" in the movie. It's "fly" in the book. They're both correct. Ergo we default to what the original editor wanted, said editor being [[User:Derik]], unless he pops up to say otherwise. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] 16:40, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
:I'm no LOTR fan by any stretch of the imagination. I don't know from nothing. But a quick google shows me that there's actually quite a bit of debate over whether or not he says "fly" or "run" in the movie. It's been pointed out to me that the ''script'' for the movie says "fly"... - ''McFeely, not signed in''
::Well I'll be damned, you're right. It's hard to distinguish, but [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GavYHXylPVc he actually does say "fly"]. I AM DISHONORED! -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] 17:26, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

==Reverted Deletion==
Dear Interrobang,

Please don't just delete whole subsections like that, which someone (me) has obviously put some time into writing, quote-transcribing and fact-checking. If you think it is incorrect, or lacks merit, fine. But when it's a substantial little chunk of contribution, I think it would at least be polite to raise the issue first rather than just unilaterally vanishing it, don't you?

As to the issue at hand, I think your assessment that the BWII catalogue is noncanon is debatable. It's been included in the Beast Wars Megs article for ages with no notes to that effect. If you have additional information which supports your claim to noncanon (and really, what in Japan ''is'' noncanon these days?), please include it in the relevant article, and discuss it here.

Regarding the messy Japanese timeline... well, ditto, basically. The point of the section I wrote it that it is thoroughly unclear WHICH Megatron the Predacons were searching for. Unless you have some new information to add, I don't see the basis for your deletion.

If you feel you have a reasonable justification, please outline it here. In the meantime, I have reverted your deletion, as well as the brief one you removed from G1 Megs' article.

[[User:PacifistPrime|PacifistPrime]][[User:PacifistPrime|PP]] 06:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

:For goodness sake, you just deleted it again! Will you please be a grown-up and discuss this?

:For starters, you are asserting that this is all on the basis of the catalogue: IT ISN'T. If you watch the movie it is genuinely ambiguous as to which Megatron they're talking about, even if you completely ignore the catalogue. On that basis alone it merits inculsion.

:Some reasonable discussion next time, if you ''please''.

:[[User:PacifistPrime|PacifistPrime]][[User:PacifistPrime|PP]] 06:22, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

::The issue is that you're making an entire section of pointless filler when "Whether Galvatron meant Generation 1 or ''Beast Wars'' Megatron is unknown." was more than sufficient enough. You then proceeded to push your opinion that G1 Megatron ''was'' intended because of a toy catalog that was so obscure that they either ignored or overlooked it when putting ''Beast Wars II'' thousands of years after ''Beast Wars'' in the official timeline.

::You "putting some time" in it is irrelevant. The only concern is whether it's appropriate, which is isn't.

::Amusing how you insist me to be "a grow-up", though. Please don't pretend that you're better than me, certainly not when you're edit warring over a section that was entirely your creation. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 06:31, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

::: ''Sigh''. Yes, I'm sure I'm terribly amusing, thank you. Your sarcasm is equally chucklesome, I'm sure. Your hostility, however, leaves me merely disappointed. I'm wasn't implying anything about being "better" than you; I don't even know you. So please don't put words in my mouth. Furthermore, I have never attempted to disguise the fact that I am defending my own contribution. Surely is permissible, is it not? My only serious objection to your behaviour was your immediate reversion of my restoration, without even the politeness of first discussing it in the appropriate forum (here), especially considering I'd explicitly invited you to do so.

:::Anyway, you and I are obviously heading into a complete discussional brick-wall situation here. Anyone else care to contribute or venture an opinion?

:::P.S. I would be prepared to (grudgingly) make the concession of shortening the section, including the removal of the last sentence which speculates about G1 Megs' weapon-mode, but I still don't agree that the whole subsection is irrelevant to the point of requiring deletion. Let's not forget which wiki we're on here, shall we?

:::P.P.S. I'm also still befuddled by your wholesale rejection of the catalogue fiction. It seems to me that actually quite a bit of Japanese canon is derived from minor magazine, text and packaging mini-fiction sources that would be considered apocryphal in the U.S. but count over there. I still don't see you offering any proof to back up your assertion that it is noncanon.

:::And, again, it has been featured in BW Megs' page for quite some time without objection... Anyone else have an opinion on this?

:::[[User:PacifistPrime|PacifistPrime]][[User:PacifistPrime|PP]] 06:57, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

::::Aaaaand now you've done it again, deleting it all and replacing it with one sentence. Charming. Anyone seeing a pattern here?

::::Here's an idea: How about we both leave it alone until some ''other'' people have two seconds to bring their opinons to the issue? Some manners wouldn't go astray either, might I add.

::::[[User:PacifistPrime|PacifistPrime]][[User:PacifistPrime|PP]] 07:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
:::::My point regarding the catalog is that A) it evidently doesn't matter to the Japanese or they wouldn't have put ''Beast Wars II'' in a later era (thus making it noncanon in that regard; as in, not part of continuity), so why should it matter in this case? And B) even if it's part of continuity, it doesn't rule out BW Megatron. It's a Japanese children's cartoon. It's not there to abide to something drummed up by marketers to sell toys (L@@K!!! Galvatron beat up Megatron! Buy his toy to bask in the awesomeness!). Beyond the catalog, your section has nothing but "maybe BW or maybe G1".

:::::I'm sorry you feel incredible offense that your edits are being undone or changed, but this is a ''wiki''. Everything is allowed to be edited by whether other editors see fit. If a new edit is contested, the answer generally is not to redo it over and over and insult the supposed maturity of the guy deleting it. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 07:20, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
::::::Pacci{{m-}} don't just keep reverting something someone else keeps reverting. Either try to bring your edits in line with the dissenting editor to form a consensus, or try and bring in other opinions to help form a consensus. This sectionw as much too long for the subject it addressed, I've trimmed it.
::::::Interrobang- the 'BW2 and Neo are much later' thing is a retcon dating from 2007. Lots of ''other'' stuff published when BW2 was originally in production fits BW2 occurring at the same time ''much'' better. The canon says what it says- and when it contradicts itself you don't get to use the retcon to just dismiss the existence of the old understanding. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 09:56, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
:::::::Goddamnit. The point is that we have no way of knowing the movie's writers knew or cared about a ''toy catalog''. The guys who made the timeline obviously didn't, despite even more obscure shit making it in. Do we expect the writers of the Generation 1 cartoon to care about "[[Reinforcements from Cybertron!]]"? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 10:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
::::::::The catalog reflects the understanding in place at the time in Japan, which may reasonably be expected to be shared by the writers, even if they're not specifically aware of the catalog itself.
::::::::And more to the point- ti doesn't matter whether ''they'' care about the catalog's existance- ''we do''. And in this case- it wasn't bvendign the article over backwards to mention it- it was mentioned in passing as one of many things that could clarify an ambiguous part of the movie- all of which point in the same direction. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 10:20, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
:::::::::The "understanding in place at the time in Japan" was "Galvatron once beat up Megatron"? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 10:24, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
::::::::::The "understanding in place at the time in Japan" was "BW and BW2 take place at more or less the same time, so it's ''possible'' for Galvatron and Megatron to have come to blows." Yes. As opposed to the 10-year-later retcon that they are separated by untold millennia of time. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 10:30, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
How the Hell does one thing logically lead to the another? The point of contention is whether they did fight, not if it's "possible" they did. (Do you even have any other sources that state ''Beast Wars II'' happens at the same time as ''Beast Wars''?)[[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 10:38, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

{{quote|If a new edit is contested, the answer generally is not to redo it over.|Interrobang}}
'''You''', who self-rightiously declare ''Let the reader decide based on the facts instead of feeding them opinion'', now know that by your butchering of others exits to excise and minimize elements of the canon your admit you dont' care for and don't think should count... you have transformed this from a two-sized argument presenting reasons why the movie could be referring to either G1 or BW Megs- into a 1-sided argument where every sentence supports it being G1 Megatron.

And while I [[personal canon|personally]] believe that to be correct, it is ''incorrect'' to present the Movie as having done so. Hack.

Also, last time you kneejerk reverted, you erased a structural correction I made to the article outside of that section. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 10:41, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
:I really don't want to argue, since I really can't make any discernible sense of your bullshit. But I'll try.
:*"the canon your admit you dont' care for and don't think should count"
:Where did I say this? Since you obviously have shitty reading comprehension, I'll explain, again. I'm saying it's likely that the writers didn't care for the catalog, and it's not canon (or "in continuity", if you prefer) according to the timeline. All your cries for "but it's canon" make no fucking sense, since the canon timeline shoots it out of the water. But you're apt to ignore the timeline because... you don't like it.
:*"you have transformed this from a two-sized argument presenting reasons why the movie could be referring to either G1 or BW Megs- into a 1-sided argument where every sentence supports it being G1 Megatron."
:It ''wasn't'' a one-sided argument for G1 Megatron before my edit? Coulda fucking fooled me. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 10:57, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

::[[Canon|Everything is canon]]. The fact that Japan, 10 years after-the-fact imposed a giant retcon (with no supporting fiction, at all) wiping one official approved source out of continuity doesn't mean it no longer counts on this wiki.
::And while all signs seem to point to it being G1 MEgs int he movie- the section used to at least ''acknowledge'' one argument why BW Megs would be a better fit. You deleted that- leaving just across-the-board pro-G1 citations. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 11:06, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
:::Yes, everything is canon. That doesn't mean they all fit together or we can't acknowledge doubt that the writer was aware of it. And the point of my edits was to simply provide facts, not arguments, but whatever. I didn't have a particular issue with the "symmetry" bit. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 11:24, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
:::But you nonetheless removed it in the process of rephrasing things to fit your predispositions.
:::Whetever. McFeely's edit is verbose- but it covers all the issues fairly. You feel the same? -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 11:35, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
::::I removed it not because I had "predispositions" (nor did I do anything for such). I removed it because it wasn't a straight fact, unlike dialogue and events. I still disagree with "the greatest and most vicious Transformer in history" being an good indicator for G1 Megatron, considering the adulation Primal got in the same movie, but I just can't give a shit anymore. Out of curiosity, just what the ''Hell'' do you think my motivation is? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 11:48, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

''You then proceeded to push your opinion that G1 Megatron was intended because of a toy catalog that was so obscure that they either ignored or overlooked 
''My point regarding the catalog is that A) it evidently doesn't matter to the Japanese or they wouldn't have put Beast Wars II in a later era (thus making it noncanon in that regard; as in, not part of continuity) 
''Goddamnit. The point is that we have no way of knowing the movie's writers knew or cared about a toy catalog.

I think your motivation is that the toy catalog cheeses you off for some reason, so you were doign your damndest to remove any reference to it, or belittle its existance. And as much as you claim "I don't think 'the most viscious TF' necessarily refers to G1 Megs" was your motication, in [http://transformers.wikia.com/index.php?title=Lio_Convoy_in_Imminent_Danger&oldid=157069 Revision 157069] you completely ignored that section, instead focusing on the catalog to say ''A toy catalog states that ''Beast Wars'' Megatron and Galvatron were rivals, but whether the writers knew or cared about it isn't known.''
If me making assumptions about your motivations offends you- then I'm sorry. It is perhaps more accurate to say I object to your ''actions'', which consistently have exised or minimized the catalog's place in canon-- including your ''first'' revision whose memo field unilaterally declared 'The catalog clearly isn't canon.' -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 12:04, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
:I didn't ignore the "greatest blah blah" part, as I removed the part where it was said to indicate G1 Megatron. I made it more open-ended, leaving it to the reader to decide whether it referred to BW or G1. As for the canon quibbles, I meant "not in canon (continuity) with the movie" and not a good indicator for what was intended in the movie. But we've argued enough. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 12:40, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Um... wow.

And I thought it had got unpleasant when ''I'' was involved...! Seriously guys, what the hell?

I'm a passionate TransFan too, but this kind of mouth-frothing unpleasentness is just... something else. Truly uncalled for. I can't believe how vicious that all got.

Anyway, I for one am quite happy with the new version, which I take it is largely thanks to McFeely. Kudos, and ''gracias''. I also think it includes a couple of very good new points, which serve to "stabilise" the argument a bit.

I have taken the liberty of adding a picture and making some very minor tweaks which I don't think substantively alter this new "consensus" version. I hope it doesn't re-ignite anything.

Okay, later guys. Get some rest. And, y'know, a lot of Valium.

Cheers,
[[User:PacifistPrime|PacifistPrime]][[User:PacifistPrime|PP]] 01:19, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

:See, now I think it's too long again. :p And frankly, this section already links to the Galvatron article's section with the picture from the catalog. It (the picture) isn't exactly crying out for inclusion in this article. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 01:32, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

::Um, really? Err... I thought I had added a sumtotal of less than a dozen new words, didn't I? I'm surprised that you think ''that's'' enough to suddenly make the article "too long again"...?
::And does the picture really do any harm, especially given: a] the attempts to suppress all mention in this article of the catalogue's existence?, and b] it illustrates part of the argument?
::[[User:PacifistPrime|PacifistPrime]][[User:PacifistPrime|PP]] 01:42, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

:::I also feel like it's a little too long now, but, I can live with it. I'm sorry I wasn't paying attention when this dispute went down; it looks like it's all settled so I'm not going to do anything, but I feel I must say that Interrobang's bahavior was highly inappropriate. Repeated reverts, ignoring requests for discussion, and a highly hostile tone throughout -- even cursing at Derik in edit summaries -- is all bad stuff. Take a "time out" next time, Interrobang, or I'll force you to. --[[User:Steve-o|Steve-o]] 22:01, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
::::Little silly to single me out when hostility and edit warring is a product of both sides. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 22:12, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

== So.. which Megatron? ==

Wasn't there some sort of rivalry between BWII Galvatron and BW Megatron? Why would Galvatron summon his foe? It seems like he aimed for G1 Megs after all...
:Please review the giant wall of text above this section for the extended discussion on this. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 11:24, 17 September 2011 (EDT)

== Is this really the best title? ==

This new title, "Lio Convoy, Close Call!"... it hurts. Is there really no better sounding way to translate this title without being so overtly literal? I mean, look at the [[Cybertron Is in Grave Danger, Part 1]] and [[Cybertron Is in Grave Danger, Part 1|Part 2]]. They use the same "(''name of something'') Kiki Ippatsu" title format, yet the English-translated title feels both natural and accurate. So, why can't this article have a similar English name? --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] 09:13, 7 June 2012 (EDT)
::Unless there is some precedent for this translation, I would suggest either the above or the literal-but-better-flowing "Lio Convoy in Imminent Danger!" (based on the translation of a Digimon movie with the same nihongo format).[[Special:Contributions/192.249.47.177|192.249.47.177]] 13:22, 7 June 2012 (EDT)
:::I also prefer the original translation over... ''this''. --[[User:DrSpengler|DrSpengler]] 14:34, 7 June 2012 (EDT)
::::"JohnnyMrNinja" was the one who added it, attempting to make it more literal while adding in a comma that wasn't there and using an idiom that means something totally different from the intended "you're about to get whacked." Can we change it back, now?[[Special:Contributions/192.249.47.177|192.249.47.177]] 16:57, 7 June 2012 (EDT)
:::::Yeah, that JohnnyMrNinja guy was a brand new editor who spent a day making all sorts of stupid edits all over the place. I see no reason for this one to stick. --[[User:DrSpengler|DrSpengler]] 17:00, 7 June 2012 (EDT)
Can someon also fix the title of [[Duel Fight Transformers Beast Wars: Beast Warriors' Strongest Decisive Battle|this page]]? "JohnnyMrNinja" changed that one too, and it wouldn't go back to the previous title when I tried to move it back. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] 19:04, 7 June 2012 (EDT)
:There's something gone funny with the server, I think. I'm getting errors when trying to save pages, and just before I logged out and had a huge amount of trouble logging back in. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 20:11, 7 June 2012 (EDT)
::Never mind, it seems to have come right! --[[User:Abates|abates]] 20:12, 7 June 2012 (EDT)

ビーストウォーズII ライオンコンボイ、危機一髪! translates to ビーストウォーズII (Beast Wars II) ライオン (Lion) コンボイ (Convoy) 、(comma), 危機一髪! is an idiom that means literally that danger or risk (危) is/was a hairsbreadth away, 機 (measurement) 一 (one) 髪 (hair). The closest translation for this Japanese idiom in English is "close shave" or "close call". I don't know where the translation "Lio Convoy in Imminent Danger!" comes from, but that implies danger is soon, not close, and is certainly not a literal translation. [[User:JohnnyMrNinja|JohnnyMrNinja]] 14:35, 9 June 2012 (EDT)
:We don't use literal translations in cases where they make a mockery of the English language. "Imminent Danger" in this case refers to the danger being absolutely certain and definite, as though it's going to happen without a doubt. And there is no comma in [[:Image:LioConvoyImminentDangertitlecard01.jpg|the title]]. We go by what's written on screen, which lacks any recognizable comma. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] 14:55, 9 June 2012 (EDT)
::I see Johnny's working off the [[Wikipedia:Beast_Wars_II:_Lio_Convoy,_Close_Call!|Wikipedia article]] (which he moved himself), which includes the extraneous comma and the incorrect "Lion" kana. I sorta agree with the "Close Call" translation, but I would phrase it as "Lio Convoy's Close Call". [[Special:Contributions/24.211.29.87|24.211.29.87]] 15:20, 9 June 2012 (EDT)
::::Actually, I was basing on secondary sources as mentioned below. I'm not great at searching in Japanese, so I will admit a margin for error there. [[User:JohnnyMrNinja|JohnnyMrNinja]] 15:25, 9 June 2012 (EDT)

:::In addition to what I said we don't use above, we especially don't use Wikipedia as a completely valid, reliable source. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] 15:23, 9 June 2012 (EDT)
::::I'm not sure if you're telling me this in particular. I wasn't arguing for Wikipedia's reliability. [[Special:Contributions/24.211.29.87|24.211.29.87]] 15:29, 9 June 2012 (EDT)
:::::I think that was aimed at me, and I don't disagree. I was not basing anything on the WP title, because anyone (like me) can add/remove info from there. [[User:JohnnyMrNinja|JohnnyMrNinja]] 15:34, 9 June 2012 (EDT)

::(e/c)Imminent doesn't need to be translated, it is already in English, and already has [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/imminent an English definition], which means "impending" or "soon-to-come". The comma is a valid point, as that is simply how secondary sources describe the movie ([http://www.allcinema.net/prog/show_c.php?num_c=153759], [http://www.jmdb.ne.jp/1998/dv003320.htm], [http://movie.goo.ne.jp/movies/p31225/]), but it does not appear on the title card or VHS covers. Personally the original title reads more like Engrish to me, but I am not entitled to much of an opinion as a new user, so I will not argue that point.
::Regardless, it should have been obvious that title changes should need to be discussed beforehand. My mistake. [[User:JohnnyMrNinja|JohnnyMrNinja]] 15:25, 9 June 2012 (EDT)
:::Just for background, this [http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/危機一髪 dictionary and translation site] gives "to be in imminent danger" as the ''first'' translation for kiki ippatsu. I think you are trying to translate it rather too literally, piece by piece, than idiomatically.[[Special:Contributions/192.249.47.177|192.249.47.177]] 11:23, 15 June 2012 (EDT)

This cartoon clearly contradicts the other Beast Wars II cartoons. So it must go in the Manga continuity (inbetween #6 & 7). The Manga continuity is a different but similar continuity. Easy.
--[[User:Ryangut|Ryangut]] ([[User talk:Ryangut|talk]]) 07:17, 31 March 2024 (EDT)

Talk:Transformers: Generation 2 (Marvel)

2023-10-22T16:17:28Z

Ryangut: /* Mistake on page */ new section

Shouldn't this be at <nowiki>[[Generation 2 (Marvel comic)]]</nowiki>? The UK G2 comic (at least the first two issues) wasn't Marvel. --[[User:FortMax|FortMax]] 15:44, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

:Perhaps. I think it's probably okay as-is, and the other could be (Panini comic) or whoever published it, I don't even remember. Or, since there's so little to say about it, we could include it in this article as a subsection. --[[User:Steve-o|Steve-o]] 16:38, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
:: There's also those little mini-comics from Japan that were printed in three colors. I've moved all the Marvel comics references, and I think [[Generation 2 (comic)]] should be turned into a link portal to all the different Generation 2 comics, like how [[List of Generation 1 comics|Generation 1 (comic)]] is now. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 17:45, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

==About the "Errors"==
:Both Megatron and Ratchet seemed dead in the last of G1 comic. But Megatron reappear in G2 comic, maybe the imapact of Ark's crash broke their psychic link connetction. (TX55)
::Except that Fixit said one couldn't survive without the other. It seems that if one was killed by the crash, the other would be, too.--[[User:G.B. Blackrock|G.B. Blackrock]] 13:48, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

==Issue #0==
What is this? Is this the "Halloween Special" whose story was later reprinted in US Issue #2?--[[User:G.B. Blackrock|G.B. Blackrock]] 14:07, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
:Its name was "Ghosts," so probably. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 14:48, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

== Mistake on page ==

Its says on the page 'picking up where he'd left off at the end of the G1 book' as if to say this is a direct continuation of G1. There is a 3 year gap inbetween the G1 & G2 comics. During this gap the Actionmasters appeared in full then reverted back to their G1 forms. Galvatron made a return. Bludgeon overthrew Megatron and left him behind on Earth. The Autobot army scattered across the cosmos. This is a referenced in the US G2 #1 story 'War without end'.--[[User:Ryangut|Ryangut]] ([[User talk:Ryangut|talk]]) 12:17, 22 October 2023 (EDT)

Talk:The War Against the Destructons, Chapter 1 of 3

2023-04-20T19:41:38Z

Ryangut: responded to a comment

Why is the reference about how the creators have unidentifiable, made-up names invisible now? You can still see it on the Edit screen...--[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] 22:56, 6 May 2009 (EDT)
:The comicstory template won't recognize a field unless it is written exactly as it is on the approved list. the field was "|Credits=" when it should not have been capitalized. "|credits=" - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 23:02, 6 May 2009 (EDT)

== Gone ==

Looks like the source link has gone bad. I can't find any alternative copies either. :( --[[User:Abates|abates]] 17:00, 29 March 2010 (EDT)

== Unidentifiable names ==

Can be identified by looking at who worked on other Blackthorne comics:
*Williams = Alfred Williams - Story
*Fuget = Dante Fuget - Pencils
*Haxo = Philip Haxo - Inks & 3D Separations
*Stephenson = John Stephenson - Editor

The first three are artists. The identity of "Noodles" eludes me, however. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 04:56, 7 April 2010 (EDT)

Recollection was that "Noodles" might be the fill-in letterer Peter Iro, as no one else at Blackthorne worked on the project. And not sure why he didn't give full credit to creators...The other 2 installments were written, the second was completed but not published.

It was not specifically part of the Marvel continuity. And yes, we worked on Transformers 3D, number 3 without any direction from the previous creative teams (I'm not sure the issues were completed when we started) I think Blackthorne's thought was that it was primarily a novelty or impulse buy. I think you'll see that the art on issue 3 had much more effort put into it than the first 2 issues...unfortunately financial issues at Blackthorne didn't let us complete the story arc.

== New Information==

I contacted Dante Fuget, one of the people we had listed to ask if he was involved in the comic. He was and clarified most of the credits:
Writer- Alfred Williams
Artist- Dante Fuget (he was meant to do the artwork for all three parts)
Inker- Phil Haxo (he and Fuget were an art/inker duo)
He didn't know who Noodles was.
He also talked about his time at Blackthorne. He was young and trying to break into the comic industry. A combination of demanding rate (having to work long hours, overnighters and multiple days straight to finish pages on deadline) and Blackthorne's financial troubles lead him to leave the industry. He didn't seem sure how far the other issues got in development, which is fair enough it was over 30 years ago.

I'm not really sure of the best way to put this information into the article.{{unsigned|WillR113}}
:Good to know! Updated accordingly. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 17:11, 27 December 2022 (EST)

In response to the comment:
This story may be intended to take place in the cartoon continuity. Hot Rod comments to Prime, "It is good to have you back" (apparently referencing "The Return of Optimus Prime"), and Prime seems to be in his original Generation 1 form, not his Powermaster body. Also, Scorponok's and Galvatron's rivalry seems to resemble the rivalry the characters had in "The Rebirth".

The 3D comics actually take place in the generic Book continuity. The Book continuity has a similar timeline to the cartoons including "The Return of Optimus Prime" and the "Rebirth".

Talk:Aspects of Evil!

2023-04-10T10:07:54Z

Ryangut: /* Apocryphal? */

==Apocryphal?==

I have tot ake issue with Scorponk's tale (at least) being considered 'apocraphyl.' It takes place in Earthforce continuity, where Scorponok lost the Decepticon Civil War in US #72. IIRC, this is mentioned in The Magnificent Six! as well, which is another Earthforce tale. (And I'd bet that the Megatron tale fit there too.)

Aside the fct that it ''does'' fit in continuity... I'm really uncomfortable with the wiki throwing around terms like 'apocryphal', which is about one shade short of declaring an inconvenient story non-cannon. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 18:58, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

:The time-travel does make it all very confusing. Rather than it happening in the Earthforce timeline, though, I'd say it makes a heck of a lot more sense for it to have happened in the original, unaltered "movieverse" timeline (Earth-120185, if you like), before history was re-written, post-Time-Wars. Like "Legacy of Unicron," it's an experience Hot Rod/Rodimus had before history was altered, but which he still remembers. Same for the Shockwave and Megatron stories. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 19:40, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Out of curiosity - it was my feeling that the Megatron shown in the flashback is actually Straxus-Megatron, since I had formed the impression he was operating out of Helix. Was I right in assuming this, or would you guys say it was definitely, uh, Megatron-Megatron? --[[User:Monzo|Monzo]] 10:22, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
:If the assumption that the original Galvatron (T2006-Time Wars) was made from Strauxs-Megatron (given that he remembers events through his eyes during Time Wars) is correct, and if one assumes as I do that the Megatron AoE story occurs in the pre-Time-Wars movieverse timeline, then logically, yeah, that would be Straxus-Megatron.
:...my brain itches. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 10:58, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I have to confess, for me things make a lot more sense if you read that ''Time Wars'' changed history from 1989 on, and that the Galvatron who comes back in ''Target 2006'' et al is in fact made from the Straxus Megatron, having lasted a lot longer in this timeline. (I especially like that idea because it means the original Megatron might be wandering around the post-Movie future somewhere!) On the other hand, I do acknowledge that it's possible to read it that The Movie follows some years after ''Generation 2'' (so only the one timeline here) and that the ''Target 2006'' Galvatron is the original Megatron and some prefer it that way. Personal canon an' all, y'know. --[[User:Ratbat|Ratbat]] 11:45, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

There are two timelines here, pre 86 movie and the revised timeline. we don't know anything what happened in the revised timeline before rodimus arrived there after time wars except that galvatron did not go back in time.

And Chris, the problem I have with your theory is that it doesn't explain where the real original Megatron is. If you say all instances of Megatron's appearance in the '86 movie continuity are actually Straxus-Megatron clone then where is the real Megatron? What happened to him? We don't know that he blew up the spacebridge as the Megatron did in the main Marvel timeline. Besides which, even if he did where would he be in 2005 when the '86 movie happens? [[Special:Contributions/95.148.10.183|95.148.10.183]] 19:44, 17 July 2011 (EDT)

Hi

Interesting debate. Its all very simple actually. The main timeline splits from the original timeline back in #78 i.e. 1986 not Time Wars. All the stories that appear to be apocryphal/out of continuity/ giving you a headache fit easily into this timeline.

‘Aspects of Evil’ flashbacks: Megatron, Scorponok & Shockwave also fit here. The 2 Ladybird books ‘Autobot Hostage’ and ‘Decepticons Underground’ can also fit here. So Optimus Prime does somehow become a Powermaster temporarily in the original timeline.

The whole thing about Galvatron seeing through the eyes of Megatron during Time Wars is just madness caused by the space time rift. It makes no sense. Galvatron is from an alternate future timeline. Megatron is an impostor/clone. If Galvatron destroys everyone before Transformers: the Movie then the Movie can’t happen so he will never be created.

The rift repairs itself by creating a new timeline in which Galvatron never timejumped. Rodimus & Co. end up stuck in this new timeline. The main timeline is spared thanks to Shockwave blasting Cyclonus’s body into the space time rift in the nick of time.

Just to clarify further:

(‘Rhythms of Darkness’ is yet another timeline that splits from the Movie.)

After Time Wars events in the main timeline then lead to Earthforce. (All the stories from ‘Surrender’ onwards are out-of-continuity. Simon Furman could not be bothered to include American stories any more due to scheduling problems. The UK comic had gone back to what it was originally, i.e. purely a reprint of the American comic and their continuity.

Nobody knows how things happen after Earthforce but the comic would have shown a battle with Unicron and then the ActionMasters.
--[[User:Ryangut|Ryangut]] ([[User talk:Ryangut|talk]]) 06:06, 10 April 2023 (EDT)

2020-10-17T09:42:20Z

Ryangut:

I think this page should be broken up into its component chapters, or at least as a brief overview and hub to those chapters. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 17:50, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I think the fact that Galvatron would just leave his cannon lying out in the open like that in itself counts as an error, not just when Autobots decide to build a city on the same lot - how did he intend to make sure no one would just go and destroy the damn thing right after he leaves? He couldn't exactly bury it either since, assumably, it's supposed to be powered by sunlight the solar panels will have collected in the 20 years. [[User:84.250.41.125|84.250.41.125]] 17:12, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

:After he's tested the weapon he explicitly states that he's going to hang around in 1986 long enough for it to recharge, so presumably it would be buried fully loaded. [[User:Timrollpickering|Timrollpickering]] 22:34, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

==Galvatron and Megatron==

Several times Megatron has been able to take Galvatron by surprise. How could Galvatron have forgotten that back when he was Megatron, he was approached by a time-traveller from the future claiming to be the Decepticon leader of the year 2006? [[Special:Contributions/84.71.227.54|84.71.227.54]] 11:46, 21 July 2009 (EDT)
:The act of traveling back in time appears to change his own past. There is some vague indication (circa Time Wars) that Galvatron's memories revise themselves to accomodate these minor changes, but the process is not immediate. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 11:49, 21 July 2009 (EDT)
::There is, further, the complicated possibility that this Galvatron may not actually be remade from the Megatron featured in T2k6, but rather the Straxus-created clone from later stories. It's all terribly... urrgh. Furman time travel stories only tend to work in broad strokes, not in the details. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 11:54, 21 July 2009 (EDT)
::::The Straxus-Megatron clone dies though. Plus there's no real evidence to back it up that the Megatron in the '86 movie who becomes Galvatron isn't the real Megatron. No, thinking about it, there may be a much more simpler explanation. We know that the real Megatron went to Cybertron and got partly possessed by Straxus causing amnesia of recent events. Lets say that this amnesia also permamently takes away his memory of his meeting with his future-self, Galvatron. [[Special:Contributions/81.79.105.225|81.79.105.225]] 13:09, 30 July 2009 (EDT)
:::::Yeah, but the Straxus-Megatron only dies because of a conflict caused by Galvatron travelling back in time in the first place, so he may NOT have died had Galvatron not come back, and gone on to become Galvatron, plus Galvatron *remembers* events witnessed by the Straxus-Megatron during Time Wars and oh blimey I've gone cross-eyed. :) - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 14:30, 30 July 2009 (EDT)
In regards to Time Wars, we know that Galvatron is partnered with Straxus-Megatron in our reality but how about in Galvatron's memories that it was the real Megatron (who later becomes Galvatron) who was partnered with Galvatron and not Straxus-Megatron? It goes some way to explaining why things are happening differently - because he has a different partner. The only explanations needed here is how the real Megatron got to fight alongside Galvatron (which doesn't matter much since nobody cares or gives much thought to the events that transpired in Galvatron's memories other than what we see in the comic) but I like the different partner explanation more so than the Galvatron throughout the Marvel U.K. comics and the '86 movie being an upgrade to someone who was just a clone of Megatron and not the real Megatron explanation. But yeah, Time Wars *IS* a catalogue of continuity errors with no real correct answer I suppose. If you want to believe that this Galvatron was originally Straxus then its up to you. I just find it kinda messy and requires more work to get it to fit. Try reading Time Wars from my perspective and see how that works for you. [[Special:Contributions/81.79.105.225|81.79.105.225]] 17:28, 30 July 2009 (EDT)

:I'm not actually trying to seriously argue the fact - I'm just pointing out how vague and open to interpretation the nature of the story is. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 18:47, 30 July 2009 (EDT)

Actually, its very simple. As soon as Galvatron & co arrive in 1986 a new timeline is created. This new timeline is the main timeline from now on. Events then continue in the original timeline 2006-2009 and in the main timeline 1986-1989 both leading to Time wars.--[[User:Ryangut|Ryangut]] ([[User talk:Ryangut|talk]]) 05:42, 17 October 2020 (EDT)

==Omega Supreme==

I've added a little bit on Omega to the errors section to clarify it a bit as Smokescreen actually says they should sic Omega on the current Decepticons rather than the future ones (and before Galvatron, Cyclonus and Scourge had arrived at Megatron's base). It is a really big omission they don't use him at all, especially as "Omega is the last line of defense for the Autobots, a titanic guardian robot capable of instilling fear and panic into the sparks of Decepticons that dare face him on the field of battle". And Buzzsaw wasn't there to whoop his ass. [[Special:Contributions/80.176.139.71|80.176.139.71]] 15:09, 3 November 2009 (EST)

I think a little too much is made of the Autobots not using Omega Supreme. Yes, the comic doesn't give a reason for it, but the reason isn't too hard to imagine. Omega Supreme is a defense base. Siccing him on the Decepticons would be offense. If he failed, the Ark would be without its last line of defense. It would be a little like sending out your awesome goalie to try to go score points. I don't think it rises to the level of "error." - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 13:45, 26 December 2011 (EST)

==Featured Article?==

Once the ROTF hype machine has died down a little is there any chance of making this a featured article? It seems pretty complete, has very few red links and covers the first really 'epic' Transformers time travel story. It's also, arguably, the work that put [[Simon Furman]] on the map as far as Transformers go, and without that, [[Furmanism| What chance do we have?]] --[[User:G1MarvelBlaster|G1MarvelBlaster]] 03:11, 10 November 2009 (EST)
: I'd say it needs a few more images and a more thorough summary of the plot, but with some work, it's definitely a candidate. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 05:33, 10 November 2009 (EST)
::I added a few things. How about now? --[[User:G1MarvelBlaster|G1MarvelBlaster]] 03:12, 13 November 2009 (EST)

==Galvatron's weapon==
"The idea of Unicron being defeatable by Transformer weaponry has never turned up again." - Does that count the Matrix Cannon from the PS2 ''Armada'' game? IIRC, it's the combined power of the Mini-Cons, but other than the name, it's not the MATRIX matrix, it's just "a really big gun." [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 09:07, 11 November 2009 (EST)

User talk:Ryangut

2020-10-16T20:24:38Z

Ryangut: /* Please don't spam your fandom page */ response

Talk:Plague of the Insecticons!

2020-10-15T19:43:23Z

Ryangut:

What's so cute about an articulated lorry?[[User:Omegatron|omegatron]] ([[User talk:Omegatron|talk]]) 14:40, 20 August 2015 (EDT)
:It's a British term used in a story set in America. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 16:19, 20 August 2015 (EDT)
:: If it's an American character saying it then it belongs in the errors section, and should be actually descriptive. I'd do it myself if I knew who said it.[[User:Omegatron|omegatron]] ([[User talk:Omegatron|talk]]) 16:41, 20 August 2015 (EDT)

Actually this story can fit in to the continuity easily as there are multiple timelines and divergent continuities.

I would take too long to explain. Fortunately I have already explained it all on another webpage. Here is the link. Please have a read.

https://transfanon.fandom.com/wiki/Transformers_Multiverse

User:Chris McFeely

2020-02-08T12:49:40Z

Ryangut: continuity

[[Image:Animated mcfeely.jpg|right]]

The Irish Sysop One.

Hi Chris

I liked your work on the transformer DVDs. I have always found transformer continuity to be a fascinating puzzle. Here is a link. Please have a look at my solution.

https://transfanon.fandom.com/wiki/Transformers_Multiverse

Please let me know what you think?

--[[User:Ryangut|Ryangut]] ([[User talk:Ryangut|talk]]) 07:49, 8 February 2020 (EST)

Talk:Marvel Comics continuity

2020-02-08T12:46:15Z

Ryangut: replied to conversation

Can we get a timeline to go along with this? I can do up a template to (I think) make it really clear how US and UK stuff intercuts. (Which I guess means I'm asking ''should'' there be a timeline, then volunteering to work on a sane layout for it.)

I actually went and took notes on all the explanations of the Timeward US/UK split from the UK Letters pages- and I think I've got a pretty clear idea exactly ''how'' the two are separated. (or at last the official explanation thereof.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 17:50, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
: I think a timeline would be prudent. Though I would imagine it might be hard to do outside a flowchart, what with the 30 million different continuity branchoffs. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 17:53, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
::Depends on the approach. I'll mock something up.
::Unrelated, have we considered a 'year' page? Similar to our overall Transformers timeline but like 'in 1988, these comic issues were published, these episodes aired, this other major event took place...' I ask mostly because, technically speaking, you should always include a year on the copyright notice on pics, and sometimes I'm ballparking. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 18:04, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

==Timeline Mockup==
Okay, I'm picturing something like [http://www.emopanda.com/tmp/layout.png this].
Post-timewars It'd probably be easier to jsut switch to three-collumn than the interleaved Earthforce/UK layout I have there (and the interleaving is pretty bad here since I hacked this together with photoshop.) But this is essentially what I'm proposing. 
Relevant ideas conveyed:
* Time Wars created a new timeline for the US stories (stated in the letters pages)
* Target 2006 and everythign that directly resulted from it (which is about 2/3 of the UK stories) didn't happen in that new timeline. Thus- the Nemesis is suddenly around again.
* Earthforce is a less drastic branch- it continues the UK timeline, but the 'UK Future' of the TFTM Comic Adaption is no longer valid. Nonetheless, Earthforce continues on it's merry path, and Unicron will arrive in 2006 while in the US he shows up early in 1991.
* Peace is the endpoint of the Earthforce timeline (Dreadwind made a poitn of Peace's healthy Rodimus not being in conflict w/ sick Rodimus from Aspects in the letters page.)

The result is- the US timeline stands more-or-less alone. A ''few'' UK stories took place in the new UK timeline (Deathbringer demonstrably, but probably also some other stuff like Decepticon Dam Busters that didn't matter that much.) Some holes had to be filled in the US timeline- and Marvel UK suddenly publishign the long-delayed Gi Joe teamup that explains why Bumblebee became goldbug instead of being rebuilt by Wreck-Gar (since Wreck-gar's visit had just been erased) really makes a lot of sense.

The UK timeline isn't the mess everyone claims it is- time travel ON TOP of the branching timelines and mini-Crisis makes it hard to sort out.... but there actually ''is'' a method to the madness.

(Of course, now you'all will probably tell me I'm crazy and am making things up.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 21:02, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
: You are indeed making a lot of stuff up. Less speculation, more facty, please!--[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 18:04, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
::Hrm, i thought of a better visualization that hangs on less of that anyway. I'll get around to it. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 19:48, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

It's been quite a while but just where does the idea that [[Time Wars]] altered the ''past'' come from? I remember someone suggested this in the UK letters page around about the 230s when they tried to guess at how Goldbug had become Bumblebee again in the Pretender Classics (before the relevant stories were printed), but the response was that this was wrong and the time changes hadn't gone backwards.

The reason for the UK comic suddenly running the G.I. Joe vs Transformers series was entirely due to problems of schedules - because the UK comic was weekly and some of the US stories were short enough to reprint in three issues the comic kept catching up so the next US story wasn't yet ready. This led to reprints in issues #221-231 & #255-258 that a lot of letter writers complained about, whilst the problem kept recurring so they instead ran the limited series as it could create a much larger gap in the publication schedule and solve the problem once and for all. It was always billed from the outset as including "the US origin of Goldbug" and never presented as being in continuity. (Similarly no effort was made to rename "G.I. Joe" to "Action Force", even though that would have been the "correct" name at that point in their UK timeline.) [[User:Timrollpickering|Timrollpickering]] 20:32, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

==Timeline Mockup 2==
[http://www.emopanda.com/tmp/marvel_continuity.jpg Simplified.]

Okay, this si what happened. Around timewars, the Original Target 2006 future got invalidated, so when Rodimus et al, traveled froward, ti was suddenly to a new and different future. thus, Earthforce is after Timewaars in a really straightforward 'this possible future that caused us no end of grief is no longer possible' sort of way'

Simultaneously, the timerify in timeaars created a 'post crisis' continuity that the US stories from, say, US #72 forward take place in. Everythign replating to the time-travelign Galvatron got yanked out (and suddenly the nemesis is no longer destroyed, etc.) This is ''explicitly explaind'' in the US letters page.

UK continuity continues relatively unimpeded, just with the original future invalidated, US continuity takes place on a post-crisis (post-Timewars) earth. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 22:31, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

:Neither of these theories is right. Its actually all very simple. In the UK continuity there are 3 timelines. The main timeline splits from the original by Galvatron arriving in Target: 2006. The space time rift repairs itself by replacing the original time line with the 'Rhythms of darkness' timeline in which Galvatron never time-jumped. Earthforce takes place between 'Price of life' and 'Surrender' in a massive plot loop. (This was due to publishing problems at the time). A complete list can be found on the Marvel wikia and on a talk page of the Transformers wikia. Have a look and you will see it all makes sense. {{unsigned|91.194.221.231|07:43, October 6, 2011 (EDT)}}
::This stuff is interesting. It seems almost possible to nail down what the deal is with all the timelines (OK, maybe not ''The Big Broadcast of 2006''). It is true that Rhythms of Darkness is one ''possible'' post-Time Wars replacement for the original UK future. Another possible replacement is the main continuity we got in the comic. It makes me wonder what event caused us to get Unicron loosing instead of Unicron winning. I'd like to hear more about what exactly was ''explicitly explained'' in the US letters page. Preferalbly withuot typos. Why was the US letters page talking about Time Wars? - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 12:31, 6 October 2011 (EDT)

==On plot summaries==

I made a suggestion in regards to "in-universe" story summaries, but I made it in response to a year-old discussion on a character's talk page, so I think it probably was overlooked. I don't know if the suggestion is still relevant, but this seems to be a good place to put it forth again.

For context, the discussion was about writing summaries as in-universe, as actual events that really happened, and the counter-argument was that people may want to go back and view a story, but writing in-universe would not allow issue or episode number/title references.

What if we write the articles referring to plot points as events, as opposed to story titles, but we still put superscript links where appropriate, with the matching footnotes used to denote episode or issue numbers and titles? That way the article itself is still written "in-universe", but we also provide a reference for anyone who wishes to watch or read the plot in question.

Like I said, it was a year ago discussion I replied to. Maybe a solution's already been found? --[[User:Sntint|Sntint]] 18:11, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
:Footnotes, italicised notes, contextual linking like "Blaster was surprised to see Straxus single again, as he had previously been seen getting gay-married in Hawaii." Doesn't that about cover it? -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 18:44, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
::Also, [[Template:Storylink]] --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 18:53, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

==Balls==

Do we '''really''' need to be making such jokes in front of kids? And it's not even a very good "balls" joke. --[[User:Rotty|Rotty]] 19:02, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
: I can change it to "testicles," if you want. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 19:46, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
:: Ah, but do we really want to be referring to the Classics comic as something creative? --[[User:Rotty|Rotty]] 19:53, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
::: How about the "semen-encrusted underside of the continuity"? --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 19:56, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
:::: Perfect! --[[User:Rotty|Rotty]] 20:01, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I, uh, I kind of agree with Rotty's first statement that this isn't even a good joke. It's a real stretch, honestly. The classics bubble itself is the only remotely phallic part of the diagram so I don't see how it could be considered the balls. Also, the diagram kind of sucks anyway. Sorry, Walky. :( --[[User:Steve-o|Steve-o]] 19:41, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

== Marvel UK/Earthforce, post-Classics & RG1 ==

I've been thinking about this recently. Right now, we basically treat (for the purposes of pages like this) Marvel UK as a single timeline with Marvel US up until Earthforce, outside of Bumblebee's rebuild.

Given that we now have two "continuation" continuities that ''explicitly include only Marvel US stories'', and none of the others actually follow up Marvel UK even if they don't reject it, does this really hold up any more? Might it not be more accurate - especially in the light of notes like this one on [[Wolf in the Fold!]]:
:''With this issue, the Survivors storyline now explicitly ties into the alternate continuity of the Earthforce storyline. It's not clear where one draws the line between the main storyline and this portion of the Earthforce branch.''
... - to go with Occam's Razor and regard Earth-120185* as one single continuity, including Earthforce, which diverges much earlier with the first UK-exclusive story, ''even if'' it subsequently includes slightly-tweaked versions of the US stories (tweaks including Bumblebee/Goldbug's rebuild, Skids in Limbo, other minor changes), and Earth-91274* as another (*I don't want to use "Marvel UK continuity" and "Marvel US continuity" for this since, of course, Marvel UK published all of both continuities within G1!). RG1, Classics and any others that follow the Marvel US version of the Unicron battle (as opposed to the unseen Earthforce version), on this view, are splinter timelines from 91274.

Thoughts? - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 21:18, 6 April 2013 (EDT)
:The problem with Earthforce being seen as the proper path for the UK timeline is that there's simply no feasible way of making it work for the timeline. Looking at "[[...Perchance to Dream]]", we've got a Galvatron from nowhere sneaking into the empty Ark in space to revive Autobots who fell during the Underbase Saga. Except that it just doesn't fit with how post-Underbase Saga stories flow. If it's meant to be [[Galvatron II]] as Furman said, then by the time Galvatron II comes along, the Ark is in full use by the Autobots and only abandoned in space when Primus teleports everyone to Cybertron at the end of "[[Out of Time!]]", which is too close to "[[On the Edge of Extinction!]]" for the entirety of the Earthforce stories ("[[The Magnificent Six!]]" included) to have happened between those events. Not to mention how, starting with "[[Starting Over!]]", Megatron is suddenly back and in command on Earth when he should be either on Cybertron, trapped between spaces with Ratchet, fused with Ratchet, or inside a pod in the Ark until Grimlock accidentally revives him (''after'' Unicron's attack, even). He's not Straxus-Megatron either since the "[[Two Megatrons!]]" story took care of him. And the last pre-Earthforce, non-future UK-only stories took place around the time of the Matrix Quest, tying into that saga, preventing Earthforce from having occurred any earlier than what was already a very critical and tightly-knit era of the story. The UK continuity was simply so reliant on the US stories that trying to fit in Earthforce, in any conceivable manner, as the primary course of events for the UK timeline to follow over the path taken by its reprinted US stories becomes a fool's errand. The only reason the Carnivac Earthforce stories seem to follow on from Carnivac's post-Time Wars stories is because those few Earthforce were a rare case of Earthforce stories actually attempting to try and fit in with the main timeline, whereas the main bulk of the Earthforce saga just ''didn't'' and ''couldn't'' do that due to how much the UK timeline depended on the path of the US stories, and due to the restrictions and inabilities from the time that prevented Furman from writing stories that could fit in like the pre-Earthforce stories. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] 01:55, 9 April 2013 (EDT)

::Okay, straight away I took US #'''60''' as the (negotiable, might need to move it a bit - in retrospect, #61 may make more sense) basis for when the "US reprints stopped counting for UK/Earthforce", partly on publication order - the very next UK story was [[...Perchance to Dream]], which starts the Earthforce divergences with that alternate Galvatron II - but partly ''because'' of a whole slew of your points which come from later issues. The Megatron/Ratchet abomination was revealed in US #69 - before that, Megatron was simply shunted into nowhere in a very similar manner to US #25. The Earthforce version obviously had a different result. Rhythms of Darkness! was #67. Again, we already know the Earthforce version of the Unicron battle, while impending and ultimately unseen, can't possibly have gone as it did in US #75, so why should the Galvatron pulled from yet a different timeline have acted in exactly the same way (and this is basically what the existing note on [[Galvatron II#Earthforce]] says!)
::That's the whole nature of splinter timelines - things went differently. You might as well ask how the (unnamed) [[Nemesis (G1)|Nemesis]] was blown up in orbit by Galvatron I in [[Target: 2006]] (UK), yet have been parked under the sea for four million years in the later US stories like [[Surrender!]]. The trick is to identify the point at which things START going differently for our purposes - i.e., the last US issue that could possibly have occurred in the Earthforce (post-Time Wars UK) timeline. After that, both timelines build to "Unicron is coming", but in very different ways (he apparently takes longer to get there in Earthforce, giving time for the Autobots to rebuild troops without resorting to nucleon and search for other stuff to stop him, like investigating the Underbase's original site) - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 19:42, 9 April 2013 (EDT)
:::Earthforce would have to begin even later than US#61 since "[[Whose Lifeforce Is It Anyway?]]" and "[[The Greatest Gift of All!]]" both tie into the Matrix Quest. And there's still some other quibbles to think about. Consider this. Galvatron II was plucked from his timeline in US#67, and not given his orders until US#69. From here, in order for him to appear in Earthforce, we're to imagine that he ignored his orders and went to the Ark instead (like the page note you mentioned says). This would suggest US#69 as the cut off between the US timeline and the Earthforce timeline, right? However, US#69 is the issue that reveals Megatron as having merged with Ratchet, which conflicts with his appearance in Earthforce. I get what you're saying about Megatron winding up on Earth instead of being merged to Ratchet in unspace, but by the time Galvatron would get to go to the Ark, Megatron's a merged monster plucked from unspace. And the Ark is empty when Galvatron arrives, yet US#69 ends in a cliffhanger that last showed the Ark to be fully occupied by a whole host of Autobots. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] 01:34, 10 April 2013 (EDT)

::::Right, so we've nailed the divergence point to "during the Matrix Quest" then. The Autobots start looking for the Matrix in both timelines, but things go differently from thereon in (call it "shortly after #61" for simplicity, or take it right up to the Matrix running away with the shattered Thunderwing). But #67-onward absolutely '''cannot''' happen the same way in the 120185/Earthforce timeline, since Galvatron II gets his Marvel US orders in a timeframe which has already become irreconcilable for the reasons you give. Thus the events of Galvatron being yanked into the past and what happens thereafter must, to greater or lesser extents, happen differently since Megatron didn't end up merged to Ratchet in unspace and the Ark wasn't full of Autobots.
::::Thing is, we're tramping old ground here. We already KNOW Earthforce isn't the same timeline as Marvel US. That's accepted fact. This is about how to represent that fact. And I'm getting a tad confused about what you're trying to say - my point is that:
::::#No continuation of Marvel Transformers uses Marvel UK continuity, and at least two explicitly reject it.
::::#Of those that don't explicitly reject it:
::::#*"[[Another Time & Place]]", which you contended on [[Generation 1 continuity family]] should be filed under Earth-120185, cannot occur following Earthforce, due to the effects of nucleon in it per the revivals in Marvel US #70, when those characters were revived through other means in Earthforce.
::::#*Marvel G2 doesn't mention it in any way. Then again, it barely touches on anything from the latter part of Marvel US either, and reverses (or contradicts) a whole bunch of things from the last ten issues or so.
::::#*Fleetway G2 does not add any references to Marvel UK. It merely doesn't mention G.I. Joe quite so much.
::::Thus, with at least two follow-ons which reject Marvel UK and none that pick up on it, it would be simpler all round and at least as accurate (I think more so) to regard anything which picks up from US #80 as not including backstory from the UK issues and edit this page, Earth-120185, [[Earthforce]] and {{tl|Earthforcefiction}} accordingly. You seem to be primarily arguing that Earthforce doesn't fit Marvel US, which no-one's arguing. Why can't this be the correct state of affairs. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 14:42, 10 April 2013 (EDT)
::::Does this help?
<gallery>
File:Marvelcomicscontinuity.jpg|Walky's old chart
File:MarvelComicsContinuity.png|Chart I just put together
</gallery>

Thing is, without the UK reprints of US#67-69, we get no explanation for where Galvatron came from. Otherwise, we're forced to assume and/or make up things that weren't in the comics in order for Earthforce to work. He would have had to have come from ''somewhere'' what with Marvel UK'streatment of Galvatrons as either having traveled back in time from the future (as Galvatron I had done, who got destroyed in "Time Wars") or as having never left the future (as "Aspects of Evil" Galvatron had done). Earthforce Galvatron, however, is just therr with no explanation, with Simon Furman's word of him being ''the'' Galvatron II being our only "official" clue as to his origin, thus necessitating US#67-69 to have occurred for him to have appeared in Earthforce. Otherwise, his arrival is a nonsensical blank slate that, without an answer, contradicts the very nature of Galvatron in Marvel UK. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] 19:14, 10 April 2013 (EDT)
:I'm increasingly confused as to what you're trying to argue, because you're contradicting yourself - you're saying both that #67-69 are essential and impossible simultaneously (I lean strongly to the latter). If you're utterly determined, you can count RoD as being identical to the timeline UK Galvatron II was plucked from, but then still have to "assume" his arrival went differently, since it must have - for the same reason that Megatron can't possibly have ended up merged with Ratchet in unspace before being revived with nucleon, only still permanently linked with Ratchet. Because we have evidence to the contrary, and the established fact that Earthforce does not follow the US build to Unicron's arrival at Cybertron.
:Fact is, we ultimately don't need to assert anything. He's Galvatron II because he's the second Galvatron (after the old comic convention of disambiguating multiple characters with the same codename with Roman numerals, taken from monarchial conventions), which is why Furman dubbed him so. No page actually asserts where he came from, except as a note. And this whole bit is a great whopping tangent from the original question I asked! - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 20:43, 10 April 2013 (EDT)
::Sorry, I meant that 67-69 are essential for Galvatron II's appearance to make sense (since after he agrees to play Unicron's game [with ''his'' rules], he would instead go to the Ark instead of Cybertron), but impossible for Megatron to not be merged to Ratchet and for the Ark to be abandoned. Without 67-69, Galvatron II has no explanation for his being there at all, since Galvatrons of any kind simply don't exist in the present day era of Marvel UK and because Furman explicitly identified him as "the alternate-reality Galvatron from US #67,". Without an explanation, we're left to assume/make up things that the comic doesn't touch upon, which steps out of canon and into fanon. So, we ''need'' 67-69 for Galvatron's sake. However, including 67-69 also creates contradictions for other things like Megatron and the empty Ark. Without 67-69, these other contradictions can be better fixed, but then it leaves Galvatron unexplained and in conflict with both how Marvel UK treated Galvatron and with his being called the guy from US#67. It's simply a lose-lose situation trying to make Earthforce fit in any manner (be it ''with'' the US timeline or ''overriding'' it like your suggesting) without making leaps of logic or reaching assumptions that go against canon. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] 22:43, 10 April 2013 (EDT)
:Hey, nice illustration. If you would allow me to nitpick, since "Earth-91274" is the Marvel-centric designation for that universe it also includes the G.I. Joe comic, which includes the G2 crossover issues (138–142), which technically probably drags in the G2 Transformers issues into "Earth-91274." <tongue only partially in cheek>You can't just skip issue 43! Maybe it was a future that was overwritten somehow like the original UK future timeline, but the issue was presented as having really happened.</tongue only partially in cheek> - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 22:48, 10 April 2013 (EDT)

The end of the UK Marvel comic (Earthforce) can't overwrite the end of the UK Marvel comic (US reprints). The US reprints are a part of the UK comic continuity, and always have been, and no amount of extra timeline splinters we've gotten since then can overrule that. Earthforce is a sidestory that contradicts other material published in the very same book, no more, no less. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 01:18, 11 April 2013 (EDT)
:Okay, why am I being offered yet another explanation of what Earthforce is? '''I KNOW WHAT EARTHFORCE IS!''' Nor at any point did I suggest anything "overwrote" anything else or anything of the sort. (This is also why I avoided saying "Marvel US continuity", since that's also "Marvel UK continuity A")
:Okay, one more analogy, using trains for the metaphor. This is what I'm suggesting:
:#Short route, heading to stop number 332, avoiding a group of stations including "Target 2006", "Two Megatrons" and "Time Wars". Change at 332 for stations including "Another Time & Place" and "Regeneration One".
:#Long route, calling all stations including the aforementioned "Target 2006", "Two Megatrons" and "Time Wars" until "Matrix Quest" (or thereabouts), thereafter turning left toward stop 289 instead. No further stops on the main line (i.e., no continuations).
:Basically, I'm suggesting that Marvel UK published two basic continuities, one of which includes ALL the present-day Marvel UK original material, from "Man of Iron" to "Target 2006" to "Time Wars" to UK "End of the Road" as well as all the reprinted US material '''not irreconcilable with it''' (i.e., not the things contradicted by such matters as Skids' being stuck in Limbo for years, the fate of the Nemesis, Bumblebee's rebuilding as Goldbug and, yes, that damned Earthforce). The other includes ''only'' the reprinted material. Right now, we don't have a coherent treatment. I'm suggesting this is a damn sight more coherent than the way pages like "[[Wolf in the Fold!]]" are treated right now. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 03:17, 11 April 2013 (EDT)

I am really not following this argument at all, save to say that I don't understand why hoops are being jumped through to present UK annual story "Another Time and Place" and the UK version of G2 as splinters from the US continuity, and not the '''UK''' one. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 05:00, 11 April 2013 (EDT)
:Because he's trying to show us how Earthforce can (and in his opinion, ought to be) the "true" path for the UK comic timeline to take instead of the path of the reprinted US comics that Earthforce contradicts, which ''I'm'' trying to say is an unfeasible task. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] 15:16, 11 April 2013 (EDT)
::Sanity seems to be after a "coherent treatment," which is impossible without making stuff up. Earthforce is a continuity clusterfuck. Anything else is a lie. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 16:02, 11 April 2013 (EDT)
:::Also, the fate of [[Generation 1 continuity family|this page]] rests in the hands of this discussion. Until a final "yes" or "no" to Sanity's suggestion is decided, I"m going to edit that page to better reflect the current "no" status that the Wiki has defaulted to 'til now. Should a "yes" be decided on, I'll switch some of the edits back to closer resemble how Sanity had that page set up before. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] 16:32, 11 April 2013 (EDT)

::<nowiki>*sigh*</nowiki>. Well, I tried. At least there's some (limited) recognition of what I intended now... - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 23:17, 12 April 2013 (EDT)

These are interesting theories but you need to take into account that there are missing stories due to comic getting axed. The main time line splits from the original time line at the beginning of target: 2006. the story makes it clear if you read it carefully. later due to scheduling problems the british and american comics became 2 rival versions. Another time and place can fit in to the american time line due to missing stories. The British timeline can also include the german comics. I would take too long to explain. Fortunately I have already explained it all on another webpage. Here is the link. Please have a read.

https://transfanon.fandom.com/wiki/Transformers_Multiverse

Now what do you think?

--[[User:Ryangut|Ryangut]] ([[User talk:Ryangut|talk]]) 07:46, 8 February 2020 (EST)

2017-12-29T17:42:05Z

Ryangut: responded to Earthforce and continuity debate

Yeah. This article is... sufficient? Maybe? Someone else should take a look at it. The subject's just a little too daunting for me, but I tried. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 19:55, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

:I wanna argue about Earthforce continuity!
:Marvel UK's big Thing was that Time Wars created a new, subtually altered timeline (resulting in the Marvel US stories.)
:In that timeline, Unicron arrives in 1991. I think it's clear that in Earthforce Unicron is still coming- but slated to arrive in 2005. This is the events leaving up the Marvel UK's movie-era stories. "We lost the Matrix, Unicron is coming... but he's still 15 years off."
:In which case- there really AREN'T any continuity errors in Earthforce Per-Se... they're just Earth 2 stories, continuing the old universe while the new post-crisis one is running in a splashier fashion. There's some wobbley-ness about just when the break point is, which I think accounts for all the really odd stuff.
:Disagreements? -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 23:11, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
::That's a nice fantheory, but I don't think it has any relevance. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 23:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

:::So in other words- "Unless you have the time to go back and find page-and-pannel references to support this idea, I don't want to wast time discussing it."
:::...fair enough. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 23:18, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
::::The other huge problem with this is, simply, that Earthforce has stories leading into it -- starting with "Survivors" that work perfectly in US continuity... until Earthforce interfers. Basically, you're talking bullsnot.
::::The EArthforce stories clearly aren't trying to form a seperate continuity -- for example, in "Apsects of Evil" Scorponok is stalked by the Micromaster Air Strike patrol, because Furman knows that they belong to Megatron, as per his early US Stories. He also makes reference to the upcoming Decepticon Civil War. But Megatron's DEAD by the time the Civil War takes place -- sorta. He creates ECHOS of what's going to happen.
::::I think maybe Earthforce, as a term for the divergent continuity, should have its own page -- seperated from Earthforce the team. That way it can be discussed a little more comprehensively. Though I think what you've got there is pretty damn good, Walky.[[User:Jhiaxus|Jhiaxus]] 23:23, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

==Polar bears==
I know of the trivia, but I don't have a source I can cite for it. Uh. Anybody remember? Hopefully? --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 06:05, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
:Found it! The opening background text in the Prey TPB covers this. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 08:37, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

== Which issues are Earthforce? ==

Exactly which issues are Earthforce issues, all UK issues from [[Starting Over!|261]] on? - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 17:21, 14 April 2009 (EDT)
:Yep. You could probably include the [[...Perchance to Dream|preceding six]], too. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 17:23, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

==Continuity and Legacy Sections==
I just completely overhauled the section on Continuity. The previous basically just provided a Straw Man argument against reconciling Earthforce into the mainline continuity...saying the only way it would fit is some kind of (illogical) concurrent story approach. I think I covered all of the serious approaches to dealing with the Earthforce continuity. If these approaches have proper names, please change it. Also, I'm sure there are plenty of errors, omissions, and typos in what I wrote. I tried to cite the thing like crazy...probably to a fault. Also put in the Legacy section, which has some good arguments for what adding Earthforce to the continuity adds to the story as a whole. I definitely recommend somebody change the caption on the picture. While I didn't want it to reflect the concurrent story approach by claiming characters to be in two places, I also couldn't think of anything funny to say for some reason. [[User:F-Cuzz|F-Cuzz]] 01:36, 17 September 2009 (EDT)
:How about the ''correct'' approach? The comics are fairly clear, and the Letter Page make it even clearer. (Of course, if you've read the Earthforce run via TPB's, that make the continuity harder to see than reading them in the order they were published.) Note for clarity: There is not fandom consensus on this, this is just Derik calling everyone else's view dumb. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 02:48, 17 September 2009 (EDT)
::I definitely have not read the letters pages. If they specifically supported the Alternate Reality Approach, then please add it to that section. I had assumed anything officially putting Earthforce in another dimension would have been included in the Continuity Problems page that previously existed. As you stated, it doesn't stop the alternate theories in the Fandom from existing![[User:F-Cuzz|F-Cuzz]] 15:48, 18 September 2009 (EDT)
...okay, I have apparently not read to the bottom of the Earthpage article in quite a while. I really think every single "approach" section has to go. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 15:48, 14 January 2011 (EST)

==Disambiguation==
Since it's looming with the Titan B&W book, what parenthical should this page have? (team), (subgroup) or something else? --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] 17:35, 12 April 2011 (EDT)

==Primaval Dawn==
You know, I keep avoiding this issue, but the group of Maximals led by Primal Prime in Primeval Dawn is also called Earthforce. Though Primal Prime calls it "the Maximal Earthforce," so maybe [[Maximal Earthforce]] would suffice... --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 21:47, 11 October 2011 (EDT)

== Members ==
Could we get a list of the Autobots in Earthforce? --[[Special:Contributions/75.82.9.197|75.82.9.197]] 00:23, 3 November 2011 (EDT)

== Earthforce and the other Marvel UK timelines explained ==

Nice theories but these are wrong. The marvel comics are confusing because of multiple timelines and missing stories. The timelines in the comics are actually very simple to understand. Here is an explanation.
There are 4 timelines splitting off each other:
The original timeline
The Rhythms of Darkness timeline
The Main time timeline
The Earthforce timeline

Everything is the same up to ‘In The National Interest’
Then you have the precognition of the special teams. then
1990 - Aspects of Evil: Megatron
1991 - Aspects of Evil: Scorponok
1992 - Destiny of the Dinobots
2003 - Ark Duty
2004 - Aspects of Evil: Shockwave
2006 - MOVIE ADAPTATION
Then Galvatron, Cyclonus and Scourge travel back in time to 1986 and inadvertently create the Main timeline.
Events in both timelines then move towards Time Wars. The space-time rift repairs itself by creating The ‘Rhythms of Darkness’ timeline. In this new dark future Galvatron, Cyclonus and Scourge never time-jumped. The rift erases the original future but the main timeline is saved because Shockwave blasts Cyclonus’s body in to the rift just in time.
Later Galvatron II ends up in the Main timeline. Then due to publishing problems the Earthforce timeline splits from the main timeline just after ‘The Price of Life’ US#70.
The Earthforce stories are then followed by
Prime Bomb
Dreadwing Down
Magnificent Six
1995 - Prime's Rib
Rodimus Prime returns from the Time wars and ends up trapped in this timeline because the space-time rift erased the original future. Then you have
The Void
Edge Of Impact
Shadow Of Evil
White Fire
Aspects of Evil
Peace
In the main timeline, after the ‘Price of life’ the US comic continues, then you have ‘Another time and place’ then the Action-masters in full, then Generation 2 in full, then Alignmen,t then The Last Days Of Optimus Prime.
Sadly, as the comic got the chop twice there are missing stories.
Please note that in the original future timeline Optimus Prime never becomes a Powermaster. Bumblebee never becomes Goldbug. There are no pretender classics, Action-masters or Generation 2.

Now if you want, it is possible to merge the Earthforce timeline in to the main time line.
Prime's Rib must take place in 1991 then events go pretty much round in a circle with a lots of characters being de-activated once more due to the dodgy nucleon.
(A full reading order list can be found on the Transformers Multiverse article on the Transfanon website)
Any questions?