Talk:Erector (G1)

Humor proposal

I have a idea - given the obviousness (and lameness) of the jokes that will eventually appear in this article, I propose that this article will be written entirely 'straight', that is, taken seriously without any jokes. That, in fact, will be the joke - people expect bad jokes from this wiki, so we buck the trend. --FFN 06:28, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

What a flaccid page this shall be! -ItsWalky 06:41, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

That's the joke :D People expect chock-a-block of viagra or erectile dysfunction or other dick-related jokes from this page, so we go in a completely opposite direction and do nothing. It's edgy! It's left-of-field humour! --FFN 06:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Or we could fill the entire article with sophmoric sexual humor...but exercise a complete ban on anything that's even vaguely about erections, just to confuse people. -Derik 07:20, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Lilformers has a better joke than the crap you get about erections. Why not just say something about his name? One little Micro-Master didn't QUITE make it to name day on time... 86.17.124.125 14:57, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Editing the humorous captions is a privilege accorded to editors who have made notable contributions to the wiki. Looking over your contribution history, you're not there yet. I recommend you get an account and find a substantive way to contribute, before editing the humor. JW 15:09, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I've got a Wikipedia account which I use for minor edits. And I just moved that username into Teletraan. And there's no reason to accuse me of being like Megatron. I'm smarter than him. Harley Quinn hyenaholic 15:22, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Excellent, thank you for getting an account. Now, please stop editing captions until you've made some substantial contributions. Thank you. JW 15:32, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

An Idea

I've written an alternative version of this at User:-Blackout-/Erector. Read and discuss, please.

(Before anyone asks: yes, we can take out the Wikipedia-style captions.) ---Blackout- 12:44, 6 March 2010 (EST)

Much better. - Starfield 12:52, 6 March 2010 (EST)

Any chance of feedback from other people? I won't mind if you blow the idea to hell, really. :) ---Blackout- 15:33, 19 March 2010 (EDT)

I actually like the snickering about his name in the current article, sorry. Also, your word choice in the above comment is somewhat unfortunate. Khajidha 15:46, 19 March 2010 (EDT)

What? How? Impossible! Surely it isn't! [endsarcasm]

(I hate being a non-native English speaker.) ---Blackout- 16:24, 19 March 2010 (EDT)

I don't get that page. The differences are mainly the removal of the "(*snort*)","(*giggle*)" and such. So, what's that supposed to be, anyway? Is there some point I'm missing?

Item42 02:21, 15 June 2010 (EDT)

Hall of Fame

Thought the consensus was HoF bios are in the New Aligned continuity?--76.28.76.206 13:25, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

Not all bios are aligned, look at the Beast Wars characters. Alientraveller 13:28, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

So what decides Erectors is G1 and say Jazz's is NA?--76.28.76.206 13:34, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

I agree. The BW guys are...different, because nothing like BW exists in the Prime-iverse such as it is so far. But Hasbro has made it clear that everything they do now is supposed to fit into their Grand New Continuity, so I think in the absence of aa reason it ISN'T, we have to assume Erector's bio IS. -LV 13:37, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

To be the biggest difference is that there is no "aligned" Erector in any other way other than this bio. Heck, the G1 one barely exists other than a toy and a story page. All the other bios usually take an amalgamation of each "version" of the character. This only has the G1. I see no reason to create an Erector page. However, if Erector appears in the fiction in the future, the bio can move accordingly. --Bluestreak7 13:53, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

I sorta agree. Unless we get official word about Erector in specific or he shows up in "aligned" fiction, I don't think splitting out an one-off bio is all that useful. —Interrobang 13:59, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

There's also the fact that this year's bios are a heck of a lot less "Aligned" than last year's. Jazz has lost the "Prime's best friend" and "Cyber-Ninja" aspects, Shockwave lost his "gets emotional" bit... --Detour 14:01, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

I don't see it as losing things they mentioned last year, but just trying not to be repetitive. --Khajidha 14:04, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

Exactly. It's not losing anything, it's just a different write-up. And all of the "Great Exodus" stuff over and over and over again is really Aligned-y. --ItsWalky 14:57, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

I agree that the new bio info should go here, not Erector (Prime) or whatever.... 76.0.87.180 14:47, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

Since the bio is so short (and obviously meant humorously), would it be an option to put it in the Notes section rather than the Fiction section if opinions remain divided? Geewunling 15:05, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

Since the nomination process is about nominating existing characters, it borders on paradoxical if the process itself can create new characters ex nihilo. "Erector (Aligned)" did not exist prior to the nomination process (and in my opinion does not exist now), so suggesting "Erector (Aligned)" is the guy who was nominated as a fan-favorite is kinda nonsensical. I think the bio should stay here. (Of course, the HoF process is not really about characters, but rather about "names and the cross-franchise character concepts behind them", but still.) JW 16:14, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

Your "of course" statement negates the force of your argument. --Khajidha 16:17, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

Sometimes my ability to see both sides of an argument is more curse than blessing. My key point, that it's silly to suggest that people nominated someone who didn't exist, stands. JW 16:41, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

And yet last year apparently people nominated a Jazz who was Orion Pax's best friend. --ItsWalky 16:45, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

I'm tempted to say that this nomination was an enormous cock-up. --Khajidha 16:46, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

Walky makes an arguable point. However, at the time when Jazz was nominated, Jazz (WFC) existed, though the game and book were still in the production process. Therefore, when Hasbro wrote the bio, they could legitimately be incorporating elements of Jazz (WFC) into the composite bio. In the case of Erector, inasmuch as we can deduce the Hasbro bio-writer's thought process, it was probably something like, "I'm going to write a bio for this G1 guy, but put a bit of Aligned polish on it, to suit our corporate needs." I don't think "polish" is enough to create a character, and I certainly think the HoF nominations process should never be construed to create new characters, that being entirely contrary to its purpose. JW 17:12, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

I'm on Walky's side with this one. The idea that WfC already existed behind the scenes is a weak defense; no one who voted for Jazz was thinking about WfC Jazz. Every first-year HoF bio (except probably Dinobot) "created" a new character - they were all just quickly joined by other Aligned portrayals when WfC and Prime came out later. So the notion of putting Jazz's HoF info in the Aligned character's page is just as "paradoxical" as making a new page for Erector. I understand where you're coming from, since on the face of it this is indeed counterintuitive. But Erector isn't a new case; it's just a situation where there doesn't happen to be a preexisting Aligned page to obscure the bare mechanics of what we're doing. - Jackpot 17:22, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

"Since the bio is so short"

Short? It's longer than his G1 tech spec and single fictional appearance combined! Arborday 17:29, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

If the HoF bio did nothing but talk about Erector, I'd be inclined to say keep the info on this page and move on. But the Armada Laserbeak Surveillance System and Real Gear Quick Action Weaponry are more problematic; there's already another discussion in progress. Edit: Also, looking at the bio again, the reference to "the battle of Tyger Pax" strikes me as intentionally not-G1. Yes, Tyger Pax exists in G1, but the only known battle there doesn't match the bio description, and the Movieverse and WfC have since come to "own" it as a pivotal event in the mythology.

My general inclination is to treat the Hall of Fame like a little franchise. So, for instance, the RGQAW page's continuity note would read, "from the Hall of Fame portion of the Aligned continuity family" (or even just "from the Hall of Fame" if we want to play it super-safe). If we made a new Erector page, it would be titled "Erector (HOF)". That sort of thing.

- Jackpot 18:44, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

Dear. Gods. NO. --M Sipher 19:42, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

Quote

Am I the only one who thinks his "Why am I here?" quote from the Hall of Fame bio would be much more fitting here?
- ¡Usa El Queso! 11:08, 16 April 2011 (EDT)

I hope so? --ItsWalky 11:17, 16 April 2011 (EDT)

I think the old one works better as a motto. "What am I doing here?" seems more like a tongue-in-cheek jab to all the people who voted for such a silly, obscure character. -- NCZ 11:29, 16 April 2011 (EDT)

Win or lose...

After the Hall of Fame choice is announced, this totally needs to be a Featured Article. Win or lose, the amount of blood squeezed out of this stone is astonishing. Skyshock Thunderblast 15:59, 23 April 2011 (EDT)

This is a ridiculously bare article to feature. Even the current article, about a human introduced a year or two ago, in comic book tie-ins to the movie universe, has more meat on its figurative bones than mister Nomination By Joke Name here. This isn't "blood from a stone", it's "dead horse beaten to an even further death". --Detour 16:21, 23 April 2011 (EDT)

I wouldn't be adverse to it. Depends on whether we come up with a better featured article for next month or not. --ItsWalky 17:06, 23 April 2011 (EDT)

I'd certainly be in favor of it, considering how much of the blood I squoze myself. JW 17:14, 23 April 2011 (EDT)

MTMTE Cover

He appears on the cover of MTMTE #2, in the upper right corner. Does that count as a fictional appearance? E.g., "In an unknown time and place, Erector jumped into battle alongside Grimlock, Cosmos, Fort Max, and others, against a squad of Decepticons led by Galvatron and Cyclonus." JW 17:36, 23 April 2011 (EDT)

No, since covers aren't necessarily literal depictions of things as they actually happened in the actual story. --KilMichaelMcC 21:00, 23 April 2011 (EDT)

Could be mentioned in Notes. --Monzo 21:10, 23 April 2011 (EDT)

Trademark

Sorry if I brought the hammer down too hard on this topic, but I really wanted to avoid the paragraph implying that Hasbro could use "Autobot Erector" to get around Meccano's registered trademark. --Monzo 17:57, 23 April 2011 (EDT)

Cragun

Now that Erector actually has something to display in his fiction section, does his Japanese doppelganger warrant his own separate article like Missile Bull and Skywave?--Carrion 14:20, 24 April 2011 (EDT)

No. Missile Bull and Skywave get separate articles because they're completely different characters on the other side of the conflict. --Detour 14:33, 24 April 2011 (EDT)

Specifically, their toys were Decepticons under Hasbro (Flattop and Roughstuff), but were made into Autobots under Takara. Since Erector/Cragun is an Autobot in both, we treat them as the same character, just as we do with, say, "Convoy" and "Optimus Prime". Although we typically treat Masterforce as our cut-off point between "same character" and "different character" (hence, for example, American and Japanese Chromedomes are the same, but Phoenix and Cloudburst are treated separately), we do this with most every Micromaster, in large part because of their status as complete ciphers. There are a few exceptions who actually DID get to do some stuff in-fiction that distinguished them enough to warrant it (like, for instance, the Rescue Patrol Team). - Chris McFeely 14:35, 24 April 2011 (EDT)

Hall of Fame Nomination Video

I must see that video. Is it available? JW 13:01, 8 June 2011 (EDT)

Nope. --ItsWalky 15:29, 8 June 2011 (EDT)

Will it be?

Possibly not. They didn't say so word-for-word, but I felt it was implied. --ItsWalky 23:01, 11 June 2011 (EDT)

Bummer, man.--24.69.64.254 19:03, 24 February 2012 (EST)

Hall of Fame

Why is there no video available for Erector's Hall of Fame video?--Primestar3 (talk) 10:54, 25 August 2015 (EDT)

Footnotes

The 2nd footnote link is now sadly broken. Does anyone else have that evidence? Battle eRector (talk) 18:32, 10 December 2019 (EST)