Talk:Cybertronian: The Unofficial Transformers Recognition Guide

Hi!

Hi guys, PacifistPrime here with my third originated article. I hope you'll please contribute.

Personally I love these books (mags, whatever), even though they cost me a SERIOUS wad, having foolishly NOT bought them at the time due to their outrageous price even then. Oh foolish, foolish poppet... One of many such decisions my wallet has come to regret.

I'll try and get around to issue/volume summaries soon, but if anyone else wants to jump in first I'd be happy for you to do so.

Also, does anyone know what befell the series, i.e. why they stopped publishing with vol.1 of Beast Wars, only to later put out the index? Also, as I don't have the Index myself, I don't really know why it was so unpopular. Anyone wanna dish in?

Anyway, hope you like it, and let me know what you think. Cheers! PacifistPrime.

I heard that much as Doug Dlin would like the magazine to continue, there are some logistics issues in getting all the right resources lined up at all the right times. I imagine a collection like the one used in the books doesn't come along every day, for a start! :) --Ratbat 12:38, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I skipped buying this too when it came out, 'cause I thought it was a little too costly... more fool I.

I don't see a problem with having this series of books having an entry, by the by. Dj convoy 17:44, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Dreawave used them for reference material, no? -150.253.70.105 22:47, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Unofficial guide

I am still unsure on whether we should be putting up pages like this on unofficial guides. I am inclined to delete it before this page becomes the precedent for putting up pages on every unofficial guide ever published. And there are a lot. And they shouldn't be on this wiki. --ItsWalky 14:52, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I've been unsure on this as well. It's that "slippery slope" deal again... as much as I LIKE the Cyb guides... we should probably delete this page. --M Sipher 20:24, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I dunno, I think the Cybertronian might be an exception. They at least got permission from Hasbro to use images and artwork of the actual characters and toys. Other books like Prime Targets couldn't even do that much and had to smatter ugly "generic" looking robots and vehicles all over the book. But that's just me. Do most other unofficial guides use official artwork and images? --DrSpengler 20:31, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I guess I'm just of the mind that wants to see an entry about these things, regardless of their official status (similarly, I'd want to see something about Prime Targets and the series of books J. Alverez has put together)... Whether Hasbro has placed the stamp of approval on these books or not, these are books that have been published about Transformers, which, to my mind, elevates them from being something more than a fanzine or whatever, and, therefore, makes them worthy of inclusion here. Dj convoy 21:11, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I disagree, and I LIKE the Cybertronian guides. The Hasbro/Takara stamp IS important. I DON'T want a precedent for unofficial works getting pages, because then we're talking about every last Lee's or Tomarts or ToyFare or whatever that published an unlicensed TF whatever. The purpose of the wiki is to catalog the official stuff, and there's still tons more of that to go through that we don't have on here yet to even bother with unofficial items. --M Sipher 21:30, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I understand many users' wish to cover a fine piece of work like this guide on our Wiki, but I regretfully fall into the "slippery slope" camp with the other naysayers. If we are to cover *any* unofficial fanworks at all, we need to have a very clear and defensible demarcation between what we will and will not include. If a published book can be covered, does it matter whether it was made by a real publisher versus a vanity press?
If we say "no fan works except books published on paper" does that include TransManual, which you can download as a PDF but was, at one time, printed out? How do we JUSTIFY allowing books, even if they are crappy, but excluding really well-made websites? People are going to ask these sorts of questions when they try to create an article for their favorite fan project and somebody tells them 'no'. What sort of division can we make among fanworks that isn't arbitrary? I would LIKE to have articles about things like unofficial conventions, the major discussion boards, TransMasters, etc., but I don't know how to allow those sorts of article without making up totally broken guidelines for what to include and what not to, like Wikipedia's "notability" criterion. --Steve-o 21:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Bingo, especially the note about Wikipedia. I think it's less crummy to cut out any and all unofficial product (unofficial stuff can be MENTIONED on pages when exceptionally relevant, like how Macromasters is noted on Don F's page or "Chronicles" on Ichikawa's, though neither of those items should have their own pages) than to either 1) Open the doors to every unlicensed TF-based whatever ever or B) get ourselves embroiled in arguments over Who We Like Gets To Be In The Wiki. Both, I feel, defeat the purpose of the enterprise. --M Sipher 21:58, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Would've thought the main purpose of the enterprise might be to provide a useful resource to fans. (And if there's enough information to justify a separate page, isn't it better to split to a separate page to improve readability?) A published retail work with an ISBN and specific focus on TFs is hardly comparable to a fansite. --Denyer 19:21, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Bumping... we should maybe, you know, make the call on this. --M Sipher 07:19, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I say we have a single Unofficial guidebooks article, and move this content to there, and we can (potentially) also list other guidebooks there. One article for all of them, sort of like the Tonka GoBots or unofficial conventions or something. --Steve-o 13:40, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree with this. --ItsWalky 16:00, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Thirded. --Sntint 16:09, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Fourth'd. -- Dark T Zeratul 18:58, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Deletion/merge

While (as always) I realize we're not Wikipedia, in my mind it's sound policy to split off articles if there's enough material to merit a full article. This article seems to demonstrate such and would just make the unofficial guidebooks article rather unwieldy if merged.--Rosicrucian^Talk 19:36, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

And I think it's sound policy to not go into such length for unofficial products. Again, where does it end? Why is Cybertronian exempt, and why not have gigantic pages on every other unofficial guide? Cyb should get a paragraph on a "bulk" page for Unofficial Guides, maybe a second to note the links to official things (reused artwork or cover artists who have done official TF work), and leave it at that. --M Sipher 20:41, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Despite being a big fan of Cybertronian, I dislike the idea of starting a precedent where unofficial things can have enough written about them here that they warrant their own articles. If nothing else, it would make it very hard to fairly prevent articles for unofficial things we don't like, such as crappy guidebooks, random regional fan gatherings, etc.. (Although saying that suddenly leaves me wondering whether the alt.toys.transformers article should exist or be merged into Fandom or something...)--Steve-o 15:57, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Paci here. I state from the outset my bias, in that I originated this article. Anyway, I understand all the problems people are having with the issue of precedent, but I think this should merit an exception. Firstly, as noted earlier by DrSpengler, it was actually "semi-approved" in the sense that they gained Hasbro's permission to use the images, which clearly indicates the level to which it was a condoned publication, albeit "unofficial". Secondly, for whatever it's worth, several of the original cover artworks have been "retconned official" by their inclusion in the book Genesis. But also, I think that it has a modestly significant place in TransFandom, as the first major English-language comprehensive reference text on the franchise, predating the Dreamwave-spearheaded wave of retro interest in G1 Transformers. As noted in the article, Cybertronian is believed to have influenced later official publications, and stands as an extremely well-researched, professionally produced guide made with implicit consent by Hasbro.

I would argue that the article deserves to stay, clearly noted as belonging in the Fandom category. After all, if we can have an article on unofficial guidebooks in general, then surely there is little cogent argument to support deleting (or merging and drastically reducing) a standalone article on a work of Cybertronian's stature? If we can have standalone articles on totally unofficial things like Alt.toys.transformers as Steve-o pointed out (not to mention the various "joke" pages like JaAm, Seafood Louis etc. or descriptions of fan-phenomena like Ruined FOREVER or Toy scalping etc.), then I think the horse has bolted.

Frankly I think this speaks somewhat to the question of what is this wiki's purpose? If it is only concerned with cataloging official HasTak product, then by that argument pretty much everything in the Fandom category should be deleted or merged. If, however, it is a resource for Trasformers Fans that includes the wider tapestry of significant elements in the Transformers zeitgeist/meta-text (which is what Teletraan 1 certainly seems to be intended as), then I think a solo article on Cybertronian most certainly has its place here.

Anyway, that's my two cents (personal bias noted).PacifistPrimePP 02:31, 4 May 2008 (UTC).

Wow! I'm a recent contributor, and as opposed to lurking started contributing straight away. However, I was immediately struck by the amount of censorship that was applied to this wiki. I think this discussion on the Cybertronians highlights that there are several schools of thought about the purpose of this wiki, yet it seems that the moderators collectively belong to just one school really.

My opinion on the wiki, is that it should include EVERY possible scrap of information about Transformers. Pretend, for the moment, that a Martian (or a Human that has NEVER heard/seen TF) lands on earth and discovers these fascinating transforming robots. It's not too difficult to imagine, as most of us can remember our first experiences. Now say he wants to bring back a book (in English, it's a well known fact Martian brain physiology can only cope with European languages) to show all the other Martians. Or to bring back a book archiving all the Transformers, as he'll never get back to see them again. Where would he find details on such a book? Google would help, sure. But a resource, say this wiki, that had set to be the most complete repository of information would be good place to start. What this wiki has, that most other sites don't is things like behind-the-scenes info on licensing, trademarks, economics, unpublished and unreleased items etc etc. Other than scrolling through forums, you can't get all that info anywhere else. Who are we (you) to decide what information should be witheld?

I appreciate that to open up the door to all info is likely result in a flood of crappy fan fiction, baseless gossip and crappy customs. Personally I feel some of the character profiles start with juvenile humour bios that equate to fanwank anyhow. Thus the antithesis of the "only official" argument would to replace all the bios with the official ones. I'm not suggesting this, but official-ness is really a spectrum rather than a yes-no thing. Check out he continuity aticle as proof that even HasTak, Marvel, IDW etc show no respect for their own previous work.

I would like to hav this wiki reference every USEFUL bit of trivia. This includes a lot of unofficial resources such as Botch's site, TFW2005, Tformers.com, TFU.info, Prime Targets book, JE Alaveres' books (as his was the first), the Obscure TF website and Bigbot.com. I would also like to see it reference some of the best comedy tributes such as LILFORMERS and the Cybetron Enquirer. And I especiall would like to see i include these Cybertronians. I have all of them, but even I didn't know some of the background info until today. So I say: KEEP THIS ARTICLE!

Incidentally, has anyone considered the other wikis. The Star Trek one has the Official-only Memory Alpha. But they also have Memory Beta to inlude the (mostly awful) novels and books. And I think there is a Memory Gamma for fan-fiction. A similar thing could be applied here: Teletraan 1 for official stuff, Teltraan 2 for unofficial stuff (websites, reference works, novels, games etc), Teletraan 3 for fan-fiction, Teletraan 4 for customs etc etc. Just a thought. Drmick 13:32, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Value of the books

Just wondering, are the comments about the (alleged) value of these books really necessary? The caption under the picture and second paragraph in the Trivia section are what I refer to. Having bought all of the books over the past year for well under the $24.95 list price (including shipping to Europe, even) on eBay it seems to be a gross exaggeration, not to mention inappropriate for a wiki to try and factually state something as relative as the value of collectibles. --PTX-015R 11:08, 27 May 2009 (EDT)

Cybertronain - Transformers Field Guide

I'm surprised this isn't mentioned. Poking around, found it on eBay. Unless there's a difference compared to the others...? --Lonegamer78 08:40, 9 July 2009 (EDT)

So...about deleting this page

Going by the discussion above, the motion to delete had four votes and short of a single enthusiastic defense by one particular editor it seems no major counter motion to save it was made. Is there a reason this hasn't been deleted yet or was it simply forgotten about? --Tigerpaw28 00:00, 31 October 2010 (EDT)

I think you will find that more than one person suggested keeping it. I don't understand this fixation with removing everything from the wiki that isn't 100% official. If you are pre-occupied with keeping the rules try going to church more often. Drmick 07:47, 31 October 2010 (EDT)

This is probably the most inane comment I've read on this wiki. —Interrobang 16:40, 1 November 2010 (EDT) —Interrobang 16:40, 1 November 2010 (EDT)

I kinda wonder why this is here at all if it isn't official. I thought we had an official-only policy. -- Semysane 17:32, 1 November 2010 (EDT)

If it can be shown that official creators have utilized it, it can stay (possibly with an apocrypha tag). If not, an overview on the Unofficial guidebooks page should suffice. Such guidebooks are an important phenomenon that should be recognized but they generally don't fit our mandate. --Khajidha 17:54, 1 November 2010 (EDT)

Well, Doug Dlin, is now an official creator, and ironically a moderator on the wiki. Drmick 08:12, 3 November 2010 (EDT)

Hmmmmmmmmmm. Now I'm leaning towards keeping with an Apocrypha tag. --Khajidha 08:47, 4 November 2010 (EDT)

There's a big library upstate with lots of other books to play with...

As this site continues - rightly - to hold the line against 3P products, I think it is becoming ever less justifiable for this page to exist. These books are very nice and most everyone likes them, and they're unofficial and don't really belong here. It's a well-written article about well-written books, but I just don't see how it gets to stay if Hegemon and Maniaking and all that horde are quarantined.

I think it's time to finally let this one go. It has a perfectly decent brief writeup on the Unofficial guidebooks page.

Does someone want to pull the trigger? --Thylacine 2000 (talk) 17:41, 6 May 2015 (EDT)

Hard to argue against. - Chris McFeely (talk) 17:59, 6 May 2015 (EDT)

I think the writeup on the unofficial guidebooks page could be expanded a bit (it doesn't mention this is actually multiple books) but yes, I think the full article isn't needed. --abates (talk) 18:20, 6 May 2015 (EDT)