Talk:Flamewar (G1)

Shouldn't the disambig be (Timelines)? Or am I misremembering? --Detour 02:48, 1 April 2012 (EDT)

Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal#Moving "(Timelines)" articles —Interrobang 02:52, 1 April 2012 (EDT)

Oh, wait, I made an exception for the Descent into Evil characters. Hurm. —Interrobang 02:53, 1 April 2012 (EDT)

Main image

I'm not about to get in a pointless edit war over this, but "first design that every single subsequent version is based on" versus "comic" is a very different situation from Lockdown and his entirely new and different billion-dollar-movie body. -LV (talk) 13:11, 8 September 2020 (EDT)

The main image from DiE does not even provide an unobscured view of Flamewar's body. Why should we not use a clearly-posed image? S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47 (talk) 13:23, 8 September 2020 (EDT)

I mean, sure, there's a design throughline from that first design to the IDW2 one, but if you show the two of them to anyone who wasn't already aware of them, I guarantee you they wouldn't realise they were meant to be the same character. If your objection is that the floor-sitting one has part of the body obscured, fine (I disagree on the basis that it's characterful and there's a full-body image in the notes but won't fight for it too hard), but my point is that her original design from when she was a nonentity footnote is leagues away from the one she has in a comic that anyone's actually read.

(Also, frankly, the IDW2 design is just plain better. I know that's a subjective opinion, I don't much care - I don't think we have a duty to use a pure redeco as a main image over an original design.) --Riptide (talk) 14:12, 8 September 2020 (EDT)

Plus IDW2 is far more relevant than DiE. The "first body" is more of a guideline that we kinda follow when we feel like it, with how many exceptions we have. I do think we should use the reference at the bottom of the page for the mainpic instead of the in front of the chair, though. --notirishman (talk) 14:22, 8 September 2020 (EDT)

Well then let's just replace every G1 character main image with their Evergreen design. After all, those are the designs that're going on tons of merchandise in thousands of stores globally right now. Or, we could... not. There's not remotely enough distance between the first iteration of Flamewar and the current IDW design to cause any sort of "confusion". And we've had the argument over "relevant" in the past, when people started wanting to put IDW comic sections at the top of characters' Fiction sections over the 80s cartoon/comic/storybooks/etc. No. --M Sipher (talk) 14:25, 8 September 2020 (EDT)

I don't think that's anything close to a fair equivalence. I mean, if we're talking evergreen designs, then isn't that exactly what's been done with Barricade (IDW)? Who, well, was a non-entity before the implementation of the newer design, unlike "every G1 character"? --Riptide (talk) 14:31, 8 September 2020 (EDT)

Also? I know you have seniority over me, but I am also an admin, and all-caps, no-room-for-discussion "NO" feels like a pretty damn disproportionate response to "maybe this image isn't perfectly representative of the character". But, hey, what-fucking-ever. --Riptide (talk) 14:36, 8 September 2020 (EDT)

This feels like something that should be codified. I think there's a clear difference between "first version of Flamewar ever, from which every design either on or off this particular page flowed", and "a movie-enough toy of an established character that was completely ignored when an actual movie came along". "First body" seems to be paramount only when it's the actual first design of a meta-character. We could make that an actual rule, or discuss alternatives. Chip (talk) 15:10, 8 September 2020 (EDT)

Argue slippery slopes all you want, but club fiction will always be less notable and accessible than mass-market media, and thus the latter should take precedent in mainpics. Otherwise, Hot Shot would still be blue. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 15:13, 8 September 2020 (EDT)

There is very little I want more than to forget that Fun Pub ever existed, but that's where Flamewar came from. The BotCon toy wasn't just that universe's version of an existing character. This is where I've always assumed the line was, but clearly there's disagreement. Chip (talk) 15:19, 8 September 2020 (EDT)

I think that the big point in favor of a new mainpic is the fact that, well, Flamewar's pretty clearly evolved since she debuted in 2006, and the mainpic we currently use doesn't include her most distinctive design embellishment—the flame patterns on her chest—that every subsequent fictional appearance has featured to some extent. There's being faithful to the original design, but then there's also acknowledging that the character's artistic depictions changed and updating the wiki to reflect that. Grum (talk) 15:40, 8 September 2020 (EDT)

Sigh.
The general point of the mainpic is not to show "what they are now" but try to establish the "core", the "base", where more recent reinterpretations spring from. The G1 cartoon models, though they came chronologically later than the toys, overwhelmingly inform where the many many many newer designs come from, thus we generally try and use some iteration of those for mainpics (ideally ones that incorporate more toy-based details in a bit of compromise and concession to the "true" toy origins of the characters).
Exceptions like the Prime show bots, AOE Lockdown, and RBA Hot Shot are made not because they're merely "more relevant", but because they are OVERWHELMINGLY more prominent and widespread uses of a character design than the first appearances. They were the centers of major multimedia appearances and numerous toys, vastly more widespread than a pair of video games and a pair of "offscreen" additions to major multimedia franchises. It could easily be argued that the RID15 Prime and Bee models became "more relevant" than the Prime models, since they were the new media/toy bases (and the show was on a network people watched a lot more than Hub), but we didn't change the mainpics to those. Armada / Energon / Cybertron Prime, Megatron, Hot Shot etc didn't change mainpics every year despite their new designs taking center stage with each sequel series. It looks like the Evergreen design is where Hasbro wants to take G1 Bumblebee for the foreseeable, slapping it on vast swathes of merch and making it the base for quite a few toys designed to get TFs out into even broader markets, which sure comes across as "more relevant", but I don't see anyone championing changing that mainpic. "More relevant" is a constantly-moving target in a franchise as recursive and self-recycling as TF, and constantly chasing it does us no favors, and leads to the kind of "let's push IDW to the top of the fiction sections" arguments of the past.
As far as Flamewar specifically goes, no, I do not think "recurring bit player in a comic even TF fans think is 'eh, okay I suppose'" warrants exception. TF comics are nowhere near the level of exposure of most animated TF media, and this reboot certainly looks to lack what small "mainstream" infiltration the MTMTE era had. They're still niche, and I think this idea that the IDW iteration of Flamewar is some kind of "evolved" breakout new star is really specious. On top of that, Chip's point that her origin as a convention-original character being important stands. Even before BotCon's demise it was increasingly uncommon for a wholly-original convention-born character to exist, let alone persist and get referenced in toys/media outside of the convention runners' stuff. And regardless of one's opinion on FP -and believe me I got those- it feels wrong to put a model from a minor role in niche media that's been around what, a year at most, over as "the" Flamewar rather than the model she had for nearly a decade that informed what all later interpretations would look like. It is, at the very best, incredibly premature and speculative. --M Sipher (talk) 17:56, 8 September 2020 (EDT)

Well, I appreciate you explaining your reasoning, at least. I still disagree on the basis that at this point, Flamewar's original design is essentially a weird outlier - it lacks several elements common to all her subsequent appearances (the chest flames, the head spikes), and the current mainpic even lacks some of the distinguishing features *of* her original design (no arm flames, no yellow forehead crest, plus you can't see her pelvis which is a pretty important part of the colour blocking of her design)... plus, I will note that unless your computer screen is Really Small, the Descent image will be visible within the first screen anyway. With the vote currently pushing towards "change", even if you're against the idea either way, would you be more in favour of the Wings Universe image than the IDW one? --Riptide (talk) 18:09, 8 September 2020 (EDT)

It is not ideal, as I find the arguments over crest colors and flame locations to be very forest-for-the-trees, but it is more honest to the actual character concept to use a (non-horny) BC14-body image for the mainpic. And I find Monzo and Sky Shadow's raised points below very worth consideration. I would prefer to find a different BC05-body image, while noting that "full body" is an ideal, not a requirement. If there's something with much more visible torso, that would be preferable. If her card art wasn't... yikes, that amount of body shown would be fine. (I do not think I even have the DiE comic anymore, otherwise I'd go looking for something. Wasn't there some pic of her lounging in a seat in there? Hell that even plays into the more "relaxed" modern version's personality.) --M Sipher (talk) 20:15, 9 September 2020 (EDT)

Vote on mainpic

I think I've made my argument for why this is a place to Help:Ignore all standards (her original design doesn't reflect how she's looked in basically every subsequent appearance, convention fiction is objectively less prominent than just about anything else in Transformers, the current mainpic covers up a good portion of her body and doesn't include the flame motif that her name comes from). Others disagree. Since I've changed my mind on the sitting picture, I think it's down to the current picture versus the character model; Locoman's also proposed the picture of her posing with Cannonball's helmet, if we want something that's still from Fun Pub but better reflects how she's looked in her fictional appearances. Vote away, I guess?--Riptide (talk) 15:42, 8 September 2020 (EDT)

Change for all the reasons mentioned. I'm fine with either the model or the helmet pic. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 15:46, 8 September 2020 (EDT)

Change Grum (talk) 15:47, 8 September 2020 (EDT)

Change. Preferably Malkova's art, but I'm chill with the helmet pic too! --notirishman (talk) 15:47, 8 September 2020 (EDT)

Change in favour of Malkova's art. -- Star Spangled Sam (talk) 15:53, 8 September 2020 (EDT)

Change for the listed reasons, preferably to the Malkova model. McBaggins (talk) 15:55, 8 September 2020 (EDT)

Change preferably to Malkova's art. -- Cyberdoctor42 (talk) 15:57, 8 September 2020 (EDT)

Change, with a preference for the Malkova control art that currently sits at the bottom of the article. - Archforce (talk) 16:01, 8 September 2020 (EDT)

Change, preferring the Wings Universe "gremlin" art as a compromise. - Brightcoat (talk) 17:08, 8 September 2020 (EDT)

Change, preferring the Hoist the Flag art. IDW2 > obscure BotCon stuff, as with Aligned Hot Shot, but IDW2 is clearly derivative of her second toy. Good compromise --The Wadapan (talk) 17:25, 8 September 2020 (EDT)

Change, I find Malkova's art more representative of her designs and I just like it better. TimeLord11 (talk) 17:50, 8 September 2020 (EDT)

Change, in favour of something from Malkova as an unobscured full-body view. S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47 (talk) 17:35, 9 September 2020 (EDT)

Change, preferring the helmet pic. Going with change because the core design is no longer the original one. At this point though, IDW2 is no more prominent than BotCon, and since BotCon is her origin, we should be using Fun Pub art. --Tigerpaw28 (talk) 17:52, 9 September 2020 (EDT)

Proceed with caution, with an eventual fate of one of the not horny-poisoned Hoist the Flag pictures, or if possible a better-coloured Descent into Evil image. I hate to break the combo, but while I'd absolutely detest the current mainpic being turned via wiki citogenesis into a new toy deco/design (which is my personal metric for mainpic analysis these days after ST Scrapmetal happened), I think Sipher makes a hell of a point that she had that body for a decade before Hoist the Flag came along, which is only five and change years ago. It's worth getting a new mainpic because the current one isn't a good representation of the character, but any argument over "relevance" or "breakout character" is a non-starter with the context behind why the first body rule has been broken previously. If we can all assent a ***specific*** Fun Pub created image, not just tear down what's currently there, I'd be more happy sidestepping Sipher. Sky Shadow (talk) 18:02, 9 September 2020 (EDT)

Appreciated. I'm currently leaning towards the Facebook illustration of her sitting with the Cannonball helmet, because it gives a good view of the whole of her body, reasonably resembles most of her non-Descent appearances, isn't hornypoisoned, is characterful, and comes from a fanclub source. --Riptide (talk) 18:07, 9 September 2020 (EDT)

I'd personally be happy with that one, but I think it's worth having an explicit show of hands for that rather than considering all previous Change votes automatic consent. Sky Shadow (talk) 18:14, 9 September 2020 (EDT)

I’ll add mine to that show of hands for HTF. — Cyberlink420 (talk) 18:23, 9 September 2020 (EDT)

Keep, because "is popular at the moment" is an irrelevant argument for a brand with 35 years of history and a site that acts as a record of that history. - Monzo (talk) 18:16, 9 September 2020 (EDT)

Change , I believe her Timelines design does not represent the Core of Flamewar, as it lacks a lot of the character's current trademarks, like the flames on the chest and the head shape. I'd preferably switch to her IDW2 Design ,since it homages all her previews designs and is original, as opposed to an Arcee redeco. However, I can compromise to using her Hoist the Flag Design as a compromise, since it's the one that influenced Later Flamewars the most. MrRald (talk) 18:21, 9 September 2020 (EDT)

Keep which Flamewar we put up top, but Change TO A DIFFERENT IMAGE OF ORIGINAL BOTCON FLAMEWAR like there's more than the one scan we have, okay??? --ItsWalky (talk) 21:18, 9 September 2020 (EDT)

Change, also in favor of Malkova's art. --Lonegamer78 (talk) 23:42, 9 September 2020 (EDT)

Keep a picture of her from DiE. I see no reason to deviate from our "first incarnation" standard in practically any case, and even less so for a character as low-exposed and who doesn't even look majorly different in later incarnations such as Flamewar. We didn't do it for Double Punch. --Thylacine 2000 (talk) 07:20, 10 September 2020 (EDT)

Keep the original look from Descent. Start a thread to jettison the entire "Original Design First" standard, if you like, and come back to this if you win. As is, this is not a situation that requires IgnoreAllStandards. This is DoWhatIWantIsm. --Xaaron (talk) 08:50, 10 September 2020 (EDT)

Keep the DIE design, Change to the new image that Monzo's uploaded. The existing image did an unambiguously terrible job of representing what that original Flamewar design looks like, let alone subsequent ones, thanks to the missing flames and the purple cannon obfuscating her body and colour scheme. The coffee mug picture shows the design properly and as a consequence is also a hundred times more recognisable as an earlier version of her modern design. Jalaguy (talk) 11:02, 10 September 2020 (EDT)

Keep A representation of her from DiE. The Malkova art is some kinda fantastic, but that version of her is ultimately a re-stylized version of her original and subsequent looks up to that point. Maybe in the future, when (and if) IDW 2.0 has had more time to breathe, and if Flamewar has a more prominent role (and becomes even more entrenched as a Ruckley signature character), THEN I can see the Malkova art being more appropriate. --Nu-Priest (talk) 11:26, 10 September 2020 (EDT)

Okay, after reviewing, I've put up the Descent image Monzo uploaded, which actually shows the distinguishing features she shares with later Flamewars. I'm happy enough with the page as it stands now, but if anyone has any more comments, I'd love to hear them. --Riptide (talk) 15:24, 10 September 2020 (EDT)

All of this was worth it just for that caption. Bless you. --Thylacine 2000 (talk) 16:51, 10 September 2020 (EDT)

You're welcome! -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 20:39, 10 September 2020 (EDT)

Ahem. --ItsWalky (talk) 15:25, 16 September 2020 (EDT)

That one's hideous and has much of the same problem as the original mainpic in terms of lacking the flame details that carry through onto all her other appearances... and also I don't know what the hell those massive kibble chunks on her shoulders are from. What's wrong with the current one? --Riptide (talk) 15:57, 16 September 2020 (EDT)

It's the same kibble chunks the original toy has and the current main pic has. And it shows flames in the exact same places the current mainpic has them: Thighs, kibble chunks. It's just the original toy expressed in a different way. --ItsWalky (talk) 16:09, 16 September 2020 (EDT)

Not the forearms and forehead crest, which is what was missing from the previous mainpic. And, though I admit that I don't own it, from every image I can find the Energon Arcee toy doesn't have big floating kibblebergs behind its shoulders, so I'm not sure what you're talking about there. --Riptide (talk) 16:37, 16 September 2020 (EDT)

(also, wasn't part of the issue that we wanted a mainpic from a botcon/club source?) (also, all that aside, it's still an ugly low-polygon phone game model and i don't see how it's better than the current one in any way) --Riptide (talk) 16:38, 16 September 2020 (EDT)

I agree that it's ugly -- it's Earth Wars, after all. However, those shoulder kibble things are literally from the toy. They're split halves from the back end of the motorcycle, they match the details from the back end of the motorcycle on the actual toy, and they're placed where they are on the original toy. I'm okay striking down the image as mainpic for ugliness, but "it's not the original toy" can't be one of the reasons because it's absolutely not correct. --ItsWalky (talk) 16:45, 16 September 2020 (EDT)

...Right, okay, I guess the parts that I think of as her forearms have been interpreted as shoulder-wings. I think it misrepresents both the toy and her previous appearances but I guess it's not as big a divergence as I thought. (I'm still going to say that it's both uglier and less characterful than the current image, though, and doesn't convey the design elements that informed her later incarnations as well.) --Riptide (talk) 16:49, 16 September 2020 (EDT)

Yeah, if you're not familiar with the original Energon Arcee toy, she has separate, tiny forearms that balljoint out from the motorcycle kibble. It's a little more visible in white: [1] The Energon cartoon CGI model made them a little larger and longer: [2] But that's why this Earth Wars iteration has extrapolated arms with the motorcycle halves on the backs of them. It's basically like that on the original toy, but it's just that the original toy was very very awkward. --ItsWalky (talk) 17:00, 16 September 2020 (EDT)