Talk:Fortress Sinister

Derik, are you sure that's a name and not merely a description with a dramatic adjective/noun inversion? I really doubt the Decepticons would have named their base "Fortress Sinister". Granted, the pre-BW G1 Decepticons apparently named their ship Nemesis, but that is cut and dried -- it is clearly the name of the ship. This... this is very weak ground, sort of like Darkside if there had never been any later canonical sources that said yeah, the ship's called Darkside. Admittedly, I'm not saying the title needs to be changed... maybe decapitalize "Sinister" at most. But unless the name appears again, I don't think we should assume it is actually a name. --Steve-o 01:03, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I considered that. However- the title is bolded relative the rest of the text, which would seem to imply some proper title. This story is written by Mike Collins, not Furman (who probably simply never named it in case the US material ever did) and Collins doesnt' seem particularly shy around the material. I think it was intended to be a name.

I understand where you're coming from vis-a-vis 'it could just be a dramatic captionbox,' but that would really only make sense if it were the continuation of some heavily-voiced piece of narration; "And now we turn our eyes to... the Decepticons' Fortress Sinister!" But- it's not. It's a simple change-of location label, like "Skeletor's Snake Mountain!"

While I think Collins did intend to establish this as the place's name- it ultimately doesn't matter. Because, as you say, like Darkside, it's the best convenient 'handle' by which to refer to a base that appears a lot. I have no qualms if the final article includes a note 'It is referred to as such in UK #44, this may not represent a proper name but for the sake of this article etc etc etc...', but this is clearly the best name for this article, barring some sort of retroactive naming in the Fun Pub material that does not appear to be in the offing -Derik 01:45, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

anyone that would like to read the original story for context, feel free. (I don't think Titan ever collected this.) -Derik 01:45, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Steve-o, judging by its use in the scan, it sounds like its name to me. --ItsWalky 02:18, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Which one do we delete?

I'm in favor of keeping "Fortress Sinister" and moving the "Decepticon Fortress" text into it. I know that FS is more dubious as its proper name, but DF is (as Walky pointed out on its talk page) generic to the point of serious ambiguity. There've been a lot of Decepticon fortresses. Only one was ever called "Fortress Sinister." - Jackpot 21:51, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

In this case, the current text of Decepticon Fortress affirmatively identifies the same location as Fortress Sinister, with no ambiguity. The page move is because in the interests of wikiwhatever we really should preserve the edit history of the larger, more complete article.

I suppose there's still the question of whether we'd want to keep the redirect, but having the content of Decepticon Fortress at this namespace seems like a no-brainer for me.--Rosicrucian 22:06, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. (Wikipedia has a wider ranger of merge templates to reflect specific types of changes, this would be 'move into' I think, but we so seldome have to deal with it...) -Derik 22:40, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Ahhh, okay. I was wondering why we were giving the admins the work of deleting something at all, but the preservation of the DF page history makes sense. So, uh, never mind then. - Jackpot 23:56, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Plight of the Bumblebee

Is it safe to assume that the "makeshift fortress" featured in Plight of the Bumblebee! is Fortress Sinister? Fortress Sinister hadn't been seen for quite a while in the US but in the UK they were using it during that period. - Starfield 11:38, 27 February 2010 (EST)