Talk:Battle Masters
From MediaWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Is (BM) really a good disambiguator given it's already in use by Beast Machines characters? I'm not sure what else we could use though... --abates (talk) 16:45, 15 September 2014 (EDT)
- Yeah, I couldn't really think of anything else to use. I mean, I guess we could drop (BM) entirely and have things at (Beast Machines) and (Battle Masters), but that seems kind of extreme when there aren't actually any article names that overlap... Jalaguy (talk) 17:21, 15 September 2014 (EDT)
Continuity
[edit]These characters really deserves their own pages.--Primestar3 (talk) 17:00, 18 August 2015 (EDT)
- Seriously, this Megatron isn't G1, he doesn't even look like any other version of Megatron.--Primestar3 (talk) 07:38, 1 September 2015 (EDT)
- Hmm. I agree with you in principle, but on the other hand I'm reluctant to give pages to single toy incarnations of existing characters after we cleared up the whole Iocus mess. Now I kind of regret getting rid of them, since these guys are probably the best argument for side toyline guys having their own pages... But, yknow, whatever. Consider this a vote to split the Battle Masters. --Riptide (talk) 08:57, 1 September 2015 (EDT)
- We've been told that all of these sideline guys go in the Iocus cluster, why are we arguing over "well, THIS one looks like G1 Ironhide and THIS OTHER one looks like Movie Ironhide, so where do we put them?" Yeah, they are designed to LOOK like those characters but they have never been those characters. Split them back out. --Khajidha (talk) 12:19, 1 September 2015 (EDT)
- They are meant to be those characters. Iocus only exists because the wiki had them all on separate pages, and honestly, Things That Exist For The Sake Of The Wiki are kind of bad in principle. I don't have a decent solution here, but I don't think that splitting all of the Iocus pages off again is going to work. (Or maybe Jim S can declare that the Iocus cluster was hit with a quantum surge and split back into the parent clusters, with the only remaining component in the Iocus cluster being Battle Masters. I don't know.) --Riptide (talk) 13:02, 1 September 2015 (EDT)
- No. Splitting them out is obfuscating information for the sake of up-its-own-ass-faux-cleverness. And the Ironhide issue was resolved by putting that toy in BOTH G1 and Movie because hey wow holy shit its relevant to both. --M Sipher (talk) 15:49, 1 September 2015 (EDT)
- I don't think all of Iocus needs their own page but I could get behind Battle Masters specifically. --Giggidy (talk) 13:05, 1 September 2015 (EDT)
- In my opinion, Toylines such as Cunstruct-Bots and Hero Mashers can be G1 but Bot Shots and Battle Masters needs to have their own pages. Bot Shots also have fictions, remember there's a Bot Shots online game.--Primestar3 (talk) 10:26, 3 September 2015 (EDT)
- I don't think all of Iocus needs their own page but I could get behind Battle Masters specifically. --Giggidy (talk) 13:05, 1 September 2015 (EDT)
- We've been told that all of these sideline guys go in the Iocus cluster, why are we arguing over "well, THIS one looks like G1 Ironhide and THIS OTHER one looks like Movie Ironhide, so where do we put them?" Yeah, they are designed to LOOK like those characters but they have never been those characters. Split them back out. --Khajidha (talk) 12:19, 1 September 2015 (EDT)
- Hmm. I agree with you in principle, but on the other hand I'm reluctant to give pages to single toy incarnations of existing characters after we cleared up the whole Iocus mess. Now I kind of regret getting rid of them, since these guys are probably the best argument for side toyline guys having their own pages... But, yknow, whatever. Consider this a vote to split the Battle Masters. --Riptide (talk) 08:57, 1 September 2015 (EDT)
I can see that everyone's been moved over except Grimlock. Will/should a page be made for him? I could understand why we would make an exception, as he's the only one that clearly evokes a certain version of the character, with the Dinohead shoulders exclusive to his age of extinction portrayal, What do you guys think? Abejorro97 (talk) 19:29, 7 December 2015 (EST)

