Talk:C.H.U.G.

Do we need this? Is this term really that widely used? --Khajidha 11:17, 2 June 2011 (EDT)

No and no. —Interrobang 11:28, 2 June 2011 (EDT)

I see it used a lot, otherwise I wouldn't have created it.--MistaTee 13:37, 2 June 2011 (EDT)

It's used quite a lot, though it's usually "CHUG". --FFN 13:44, 2 June 2011 (EDT)

Yeah, it's near impossible to not see the term CHUG used in a discussion about the Classics/Universe/Henkei Henkei/Generations aesthetic. It's pretty dumb, but it's omnipresent on the TF fanboards. Antimatter 14:52, 2 June 2011 (EDT)

That doesn't mean it warrants an article. Terms like "Bayformers" are even more widespread but don't get an article. --Detour 15:24, 2 June 2011 (EDT)

I'd be OK with Bayformers getting an article too. Or maybe all of these should be in article for "Fan terminology" or something?--MistaTee 00:07, 3 June 2011 (EDT)

Not to mention it's already outdated with the presence of United and Reveal the Shield. It will inevitably be more so when the next "classic" line comes out. "CHUG" is a very transient term, like "Classics 2.0". —Interrobang 15:35, 2 June 2011 (EDT)

And several "Universe" figures used Unicron Trilogy molds. Do those count? If so, how is the "CHUG" aesthetic differentiated from the "UT" aesthetic? --Khajidha 15:40, 2 June 2011 (EDT)

I came here to see what the heck people were talking about because I saw a ton of use of the "CHUG" term with no context to indicate what the heck it meant. Rather than "does this need an article?" maybe ask "Is there any reason NOT to have a fan-terminology page with simple bullet-point definitions?" This IS a wiki, after all.