Talk:List of female Transformers

Untitled

Just a note that we don't yet know if Stardust and Zangetsu are female (and we're just assuming Angela is from name). They're voiced by women, but so are the male Glit and Sundor. I'm sure their official bios will go up soon and we'll know for sure. -Swift 17:05, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Call for deletion, Dec 2006

12/19/2006 - So... this page is pretty much now utterly redundant, isn't it? I mean, there's only what, a half-dozen known female TFs not already listed on the "Female Transformers" Category page. This List page has pretty much worn out its usefulness as the wiki has grown, so I vote it be marked for deletion. --M Sipher 02:06, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I still don't know why you hate lists. This page serves some functions that the Female Transformers category doesn't serve, like if I wanted to know all the Female Transformers from, say, the Unicron Trilogy. It sure would beat clicking every single article in the category to find out. This format also allows us to put notes as necessary next to an individual entry, like "This character was a man over in this country." Besides, keeping this page here ain't harming nobody, and it's no worse than all the very necessary (I'd say) list pages of toy releases by country and year. --ItsWalky 02:13, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Walky -- lists provide some functionality that can't be found in the categories, until/unless the Mediawiki software is upgraded to allow categories to be sorted in different ways, shown "flat" with their subcategory contents on the same page, etc.. I see Sipher's point, of course, that it seems redundant to have *both*a category and a list if their contents are going to be so similar. The only significant difference is that the category list is sorted alphabetically and contains no "notes". I'm inclined to say that makes the list superior, since somebody who knows the name of the character they're looking for can do an inline text search in their browser to find it on the list page, but if you know the series and not the name finding it on the category page will still be hard. Still, I don't think we should delete the category just because the list is better... I think that living with this redundandy is probably best. I would guess there aren't all that many lists that we're going to keep around anyway, so the total amount of redundancy will probably remain small. --Steve-o 16:37, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

How come the "to be deleted" tag hasn't been removed? --Rotty 17:39, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree with previous comments, including the "why this deletion status is still pending?" I mean, it's been at least a decade now... Xunk16 (talk) 00:28, 6 July 2017 (EDT)

No, it's been just under a month. - TBR (talk) 03:13, 6 July 2017 (EDT)

I see, am I in the wrong talk for this then? Because here it states that this begun a long time before that, in 2006?Xunk16 (talk) 01:05, 7 July 2017 (EDT)

It was proposed for deletion then, and not deleted. If you want to discuss the current deletion proposal, creating a new talk section at the bottom of the talk page for it would probably be the way to go. - TBR (talk) 01:24, 7 July 2017 (EDT)

We're keeping it. As my edit summary states, Mairghread Scott has told me that she uses this page. This page is how we got Sonar and Manta in that Eukaris story. It's useful. --ItsWalky (talk) 04:34, 7 July 2017 (EDT)

Energon stuff

deleted the catgirls. No evidence they're transformers (that I know of) sorry if I'm wrong.

Older discussion

Thanks for this great list, X-BoB.

I've made a bunch of modifications to improve its readability, but I think there is still a lot of work to be done. Mainly, I am unfamiliar with a large number of these characters, so I don't know what the proper way of writing their Wikilinks will be. I've done just a small handful of them, and left most of the rest the way X-BoB wrote them, even among ones that I would know. Please feel free to improve those links.

I also modified the way the Japanese character names were given. When appropriate, I gave preference to the English name and simply mentioned the Japanese name after it. If only the Japanese version is female, I list the Japanese name.

Some specific questions:

• Should TFU Sureshock really be on this list? I know the Japanese version of Sureshock was female, but Sureshock's sex is indeterminate as far as I know. I would assume that the same applies to Universe Sureshock.
• I have no idea what is meant by A-Armorhide.
• I don't know what the UT "Minerva" is or why it's in quotes.
• The androids section should be split up by continuity. Also, I assume that Artimus is a misspelling of Artemis, but, is that supposed to be the same Artemis that is already listed in the Beast Era section?
• In X-BoB's initial list, it appeared that the Japanese name for BM Blackarachnia got cut off. I assume, though, that her name is still Blackwidow in Beast Wars Returns. If that is correct, then no further modification should be needed on her entry.

There are a LOT of Arcees on this list. Disambiguating them will be a lot of work.

--Steve-o 21:54, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

In MTMTE Sureshock was female. TFU Sureshock is appearently an evil alt universe doppleganger. A-Armorhide is one of the Beast Wars repaint's minicon UT "Minerva" is the White Chromia X-BoB58 01:30, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

But 'Chromia White Mode' ISN'T Minerva, IIRC. She is in fact... Chromia(Thunderblast) in Minerva's colors, she does nto represent a seperate character. Who is nancy? -Derik

Hence "Minerva"'s deletion from the list! Thanks to me. Yes. (Nancy is Wreck-Gar's girl. She only ever got a name from a Japanese sourcebook.)--ItsWalky 04:12, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh, Thanks Walky. I'd just been callign ehr 'Loosey,' as Junkion-ized version of the name he calls her in the episode, but that's clearly nto her REAL name, so I'll settle for an official JP one.

Cancix and Sagittarii needs to be on the list too. http://makeashorterlink.com/?X2A221BDC You can explicitly ID 7 of the 12 members of the Covenant assault by spoken names or commen sense from their zodiac-forms. There's one really ODD man-out in the lower-right here. That leaves 4 names unaccounted for. Sagittari, Cancix, Piscor and Aquator. Aquator is explictly stated to be male in Omega Point. Though there is some dodgily inconsistent coloring on the far-background covenant members (Geminator is blue when he dies) if we assume that the two females here on the top-right are SEPERATE characters (and there's no reason NOT to, the detailing around their waistline is totally different AND they're different colors) then you have 12 physical 'types' accounted for among the Covenant Assault Force.

Libras seems to have survived the 'Six on one Stroke' attack by Shokaract, but bought it before everyone reverted next to energy. We saw her standing next to the red 'bot I ID as Sagittarii here in-between those two scenes. Assuming Piscor is male (based on his -or name,) that means our two females much be Cancix and Sagittarii, though it's impossible to say which is which.

Comments? thoughts/ Agree? Disagree? Steve? Bueler? -Derik

I came to many of the same conclusions as you have about the members of the Covenant, Derik, although I think there are at least thirteen distinct robot forms seen. However, I took a slightly different tack on the inexplicable scorpion and assumed that it was a misdrawn Cancix, since Cancix would be the only other arthropod changeform amongst the Covenant, and therefore took the red female to be Cancix, with the blue one who is not Libras as Sagittarii, and the blackish-purple one to be one of the other two miscolored (although it's also possible, maybe likely, that Sagittarii should be blackish-purple and was miscolored as Libras). -LV 02:08, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

We have no confermation that TFU Sureshock and Nemisis Srika are the same gals as thier "mainstream" counterparts, in all likelyhood they are new characters X-BoB58 21:35, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Sureshock/Strike, as AU counterparts, would be as seperate from Sureshock and Strika as Razorclaw is from Tigerhawk -Derik 02:53, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

TFU Sureshock is officialy an AU (OTFCC 04 live presentation), but there's not really anything but conjecture for Strika. - User: M Sipher

LV, I think I followed all of that, except 'the blue one who is not Libras' as Sagittari. Who is the blue one who is not Libras?! -Derik 04:06, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I am not actually looking at the issue right now, but at some point a non-Libras-model (as in, she is missing the shoulder-scales) female is colored in Libras' blue and white scheme. -LV 05:07, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Alignment is not canon. Therefore, neither is Mantissa. She doesn't belong on this wiki. - RolonBolon

LV, check the Covenant page. I think we need visual aids to figure out what we're looking at. -Derik 05:08, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

(can i start mentioning Alignment if any of its characters creeps into Cannon?)

I would still say no - if Don Figueroa draws my fanfic character in War Within 4: The Age Of Sheeeak, that doesn't make my old fanfic canon. - RolonBolon

Alignment is profiled in The Ultimate Guide when discussing the Liege. The word fanfic is not used until it's compared to Trans-masters (the sectionw as about UK coneventions and post-G2 stuff IIRC) when they say In its own way "Alignment" is fan fiction. The way it's presented is fairly clear- there's fanfic, liek Transmasters, and then there's Alignment, which is, technicly, fanfic... but not in the same sense as Transmasters.

I think the best way to deal with is to simply give Alignment its own page, so you can refer back ot it in relevant footnotes, but don't have to 'contaminate' the main entries.

Excepet the Liege Maximo. I dont't think youc an help but bring Alignment into his profile, possiby as a major sub-section segregated fromw hat was actually in G2/Omega Point.-Derik 11:20, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Ichikawa seems to consider Allignment canon, at least he included those events in his "Grey Galvatron Activity Track Record" page at E-Hobby

http://www.e-hobby.co.jp/cgi-bin/omc?port=33301&tno=1168129779OUCYY&req=PRODUCT&ett=20050825055858432037000000&parentpage=16358840&hier=20050915090721538698000000#

"For a time, the whereabouts of this Galvatron remained unknown, but the short story "Alignment," published in limited numbers for a British TF convention in 2001, described what could be presumed to be his subsequent fate. In this story, a sequel to the U.S. GENERATION 2 comic, Galvatron II led the Decepticon forces from his stronghold on the planet Pyrovar and mobilized a huge fleet of Warworlds, planet-sized battleships. Until his later defeat in a final showdown with Optimus Prime, Galvatron II weilded his fury far and wide across the galaxy."

As to how and or if this changes the canonical position of Alignment, I have no idea...

PS If we change the name of this article to Female Mechanoids then we can add things like the female lithones and the Catgirls

I know this is kinda a silly question, but should Stampy's Mom go on here? I mean she is a female TF from a Japanese Manga. If Esmyrl and Lyzak cound she probably should too right? ZacWilliam 11:02, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

We seem not to be featuring unnamed characters here, Paradon medic aside. (She had a toy)

Out of curiosity, are Roulette Shadow Striker flagged as TFU? I mean- yes- they are... but not int he sens of most TFU toys. Theyr'e definately (G1) in the sense we use the term ont he wiki. Am I missing something? -Derik 02:41, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you're missing how the tags are used on this wiki. They're (TFU) because their series of genesis was... drum frill... UNIVERSE. --M Sipher 02:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

...making our use of the (BW) tag rather odd- but then, the BW-stuff is fearsomely interconnected, for somethign that's ostensibly all seperate series. Which makes me ask, sicne TFU is a beast-era series, why isn't IT BW? (Because many characters are not, I know, but these two are...)

It's like a question of ethical semantics. It makes my head hurt. -Derik 02:50, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

And BW is technically part of the G1 continuity, so I guess let's put everyone there as (G1)! --M Sipher 02:56, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Want me to start changing links? -Derik 03:04, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Maybe-females

Because apparently after about a month or so controversy is coming up: I added various characters to the list under the term "half-qualifiers" (probably not the prettiest option to list them, but the best one I could think of). These would be characters who come close to the definition of female TF or have a good chance of being one but lack any definitive proof/argument. I added them to give this page something extra in regards to the category and because I am quite certain people will find a list of them useful/interesting.

In Transmutate's case, it's on the list because the trivia section mentions the script implies it once was female (which may or may not still be true, depending on how you wish to read the description). "Perhaps once female" is not female, but it is worth mentioning somewhere central for people who wish to know more about the Transformers' female cast. Geewunling 04:32, 8 November 2009 (EST)

Half-qualifier suggestions

Mega was kind of a transformer and female but her combined robot mode with Giga was male. Also as half-qualifiers should the female hologram computer systems such as T-AI or Teletraan 15 be added because they seem to be, to some extent, autobots. Oh and there's also that female looking Generic Decepticon in Drift. ? --Ninjabot33 17:11, 25 November 2009 (EST)

I think Mega-Overlord deserves a mention, as do female Cybertronian computers. Generics, on the other hand, I'm not too fond of to start adding because... well, we only have looks to base things on, and that leaves us with a rather biased view. Most of the females in UT, for instance, wouldn't be recognized as female on looks alone, and there's some generics that are too much of a could-be case to just list. With those limits, I don't feel much for adding generics because it'd be too subjective. Geewunling 02:05, 26 November 2009 (EST)

The "female-looking" generic in Drift has a distinctly male voice, at least in the English version. --abates 02:12, 26 November 2009 (EST)

I don't think Mega should be included. She's a human that functions as a godmaster. She's no more a transformer than a nebulan is User:Eire 12.37 26 Nov 09 (UTC)

What about after the Transtectors became alive on their own? They assimilated the personality of their human components, didn't they? Or is that fact in dispute? That is why post-human Minerva is still a female Transformer. - Starfield 13:44, 3 December 2009 (EST)

I think the female cybertronian computers are kind of similar to Auntie and if she counts then mabye they should be there. T-AI and the teletraan's even have autobot insignia. But can anyone tell me if that pink generic had a male voice in the japanese version or not. --Ninjabot33 12:34, 3 December 2009 (EST)

Suggestion for moving

I'd like to suggest maybe this page can be move to "Female Transformers/List" as a subpage, since the two article is highly related. Any idea or suggestion? --TX55^TALK 03:26, 13 December 2009 (EST)

Transformers Online

It looks like that game introduced quite a few. Is there any good reason why they're not listed here? --flicky1991 11:22, 19 March 2013 (EDT)

Likely just a case of neglect. Consider that fixed. --Boy Blunderous (talk) 12:54, 30 June 2014 (EDT)

Vector Prime

After the Shroud, female Vector Primes presumably continue to exist, but it isn't clear which continuity family/ies they exist in (as the original AVP post involved a trans-dimenional magazine). What to do? Cr85747 (talk) 21:17, 29 August 2017 (EDT)

Goldbug

I'll let someone else figure out how and where to stick this in, but Goldbug was female in at least one German story. --Khajidha (talk) 11:46, 22 January 2020 (EST)

Unifying Generation 1 and Beast Era tables

Given the continual intersection of Beast Era characters in Generation 1-based stories and vice versa (e.g. Arcee in 3H, Eukarians in IDW 1.0, Strika in IDW 2.0, etc.), I advocate merging the two tables together in a scheme that groups Autobots and Maximals in the same column, and similarly for Decepticons plus Predacons. I have already compiled a numbered list on my own of each character by the release date of her debut story. S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47 (talk) 22:37, 25 May 2021 (EDT)

Well, after three years, I have finally accomplished this long-overdue update! S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47 (talk) 10:37, 18 September 2024 (EDT)

Listing G1/Beast Era Female Transformers on their List by Era of First Appearance

Hi everybody, last week a number of us on the wiki discord were discussing making changes to the List of female Transformers by listing characters by sets of years of first appearance, which would mainly effect the G1 characters so to make it more clear when gal bots showed up as part of that massive continuity family. Iacon0 put together a sandbox based on the years we had agreed to divide things by 84-86, 87-96, 97-06, 07-16, 17-26, and maintaining the Half-Qualifier list without era divisions. I dropped the ball and didn't notice that Agent 47 was proposing merging the G1 and Beast Eras (which I personally support because they are very intertwined but some colleagues opposed on the basis of bloat) and went ahead and listed a bunch of background characters who most likely are gals (a change I am also enthused about, for example, the two based on characters from JEM and the Holograms in Ghost Stories), and had patiently waited three years for a go-ahead to do all this. Iacon0 and I agreed that the era division list could honor Agent 47's changes of combining the continuity families for this list, and I haven't heard any rebuttal from anyone so far about listing possible qualifiers. I had suggested we bring up the era change on the community portal (I didn't realize it should go here instead since it's not a site-wide change) but hadn't been able to act on checking Iacon0's prior to this post changes, and simply bringing up discussion wasn't acted on, no qualms about how this played out. As it is, the discussion is being brought up now, the reason dividing by eras of first appearance was considered important was because that way it would more effectively communicate to people new to transformers that these characters weren't all around for decades as of now. The year divisions were an agreed compromise over when different portions of media began and ended. We'd appreciate any feedback people have on this, thank you y'all. Causeway (talk) 14:57, 18 September 2024 (EDT)

I think all the "Possibly" entries are both pretty speculatory and bloating the list. Like, if they dont even have a name, I dont think we can claim they have a definite gender and belong here. AkibaSilver (talk) 15:02, 18 September 2024 (EDT)

Looking at the page as it is now... yes, it could use a lot of work. Ans yeah, I'm not exactly feeling the "Half-qualifier" entries; at the very least, simply calling them that feels... well, it don't feel good. But I don't think doing this page by the proposed year breakups is that good of an idea. I mean, this is a list sub-page to just show you who already exists in what franchise chunk, all the historical context of when and where is over on the main page. This feels like trying to make this page do more than it's supposed to and just getting messy in a very arbitrary way in the process.

Now, things that absolutely could use work, right off the top of my head, is making this page way, way less vertical. A lot of these lists can stand to have another column or two per "allegiance" and not waste so much space. And honestly I'm not sure the "order of appearance" is necessary at all... in fact, I'm not particularly sold on using the "character list" templates in the first place.

And as I think about it more, it's possible a cleaner "collist" would also make it easier to further break up these giant whompin' lists in a way that matches the breakdown of the main page. Hell, we could even provide a direct link to the relevant list-page section from the main page in each subheader. You read about how IDW expanded the crap outta the concept, and boom, there's a link right at the bottom of the section leading to a list of who showed up in the IDW continuities. I think having this page match the main page in general format/division will be much more beneficial to readers and keep the historical contexts (especially if we add the relevant years to the headers, like "The Transformers cartoon (1984-1986)". Would it mean some characters appear on this list page more than once? Yes, of course. Would it be useful for them to? I'd say yes. Making these pages functional twins of each other, one providing the bulky contexts and the other providing the bulky specific numbers, but split via suite so neither page becomes monstrously huge, feels like a better move the more I mull it. --M Sipher (talk) 16:11, 18 September 2024 (EDT)

Addendum: Some of the sub-headers I think we'd probably want to merge, when we only got like, one or three characters per. Like, we could probably stand to mix the post-Hasbro-cartoon Japanese media characters into a single chunk. Not convinced we'd need to be super-granular for Aligned as a whole either (also, that section on main is missing Rescue Bots, whoops). --M Sipher (talk) 16:16, 18 September 2024 (EDT)

Option: sortable table. Saix (talk) 19:20, 18 September 2024 (EDT)

Matching it with its sister page was something I also suggested. Of course there are a few outlier toys and the like, but I like the idea consistency/compatibility between the pages and think that would ultimately serve them well.

And I've been working on a very similar set-up in a Sandbox myself! It would be great if there was a way to collapse columns; I was peeking around on Wikipedia and found that that had been proposed, but not yet implemented. I think being able to sort the list in its entirety by different categories would be extremely useful (for me at least) and it would be cool to implement elsewhere on the site -- but I also think it would be nice to be able to pare down the options you have to see at any given time. That said, I get it if none of that is exactly ideal formatting-wise. Ashendawn (talk) 19:44, 18 September 2024 (EDT)

How is "Honorable Mentions" instead of "Half-Qualifiers"? Ashendawn (talk) 20:30, 18 September 2024 (EDT)

Criteria for inclusion

I have a bit of a controversial take — I’m not sure it’s 100% fair to include the likes of “Cheesecake robot” on the list proper.

I’d like to preface this with the fact that while I am coming at this primarily from an accuracy perspective, this is also coming from an AFAB who wants more than anything for this franchise to give us more non-male characters… but who also doesn’t like things being assumed about them based on the way they look. I am also aware that fictional characters are not the same as real-life people, and that 40 years makes a difference in terms of how people view the subject of gender in and out of media. There’s a lot of nuance involved, but as a wiki with pages about the subject of female Transformers, I think it’s fair to ask:

What is the criteria for inclusion as a female Transformer?

Living humans are mutable creatures, and society has grown to a point where the acceptance of gender as a spectrum that doesn't have clear boundaries and is ultimately decided by each individual for themselves is more widely spread than it was when this franchise started. Fictional characters in concluded media don't usually have that luxury — there are occasionally retcons or "word of god" scenarios, but aside from that, all we have is the text itself. We may make inferences based on context where the explicit text fails to make something clear, but that's where the criteria comes in. What is a fair way of deciding which characters belong on a list of lady bots, whose ratio to bots who use "he/him" (whether they be explicitly male or "genderless") is criminally small? How do we determine — on a wiki that tries to stay as accurate to the information it covers while also providing relevant context — who is woman-y enough for the woman club? Who is woman-y enough to be honorably mentioned? Who is a woman in our hearts, but doesn't have the evidence to "prove" it in the text?

Is there anything that confirms Cheesecake robot as a she, or even a Transformer? Is the ruling is that because she's based on Arcee's character model, she counts? She looks conventionally "feminine" and considering that it was 1986, sure, it makes sense that they are assumed to be female. But is there anything in the script that implies their gender, or even their species?

Combination granny and attack-dog-bot is also never explicitly confirmed as female or a Transformer — or even of Transformer technology, though obviously one might assume as much (the current phrasing in the article of "supposedly" implies that there was something said to suggest that it is TF tech, but nothing in the episode itself says so). Is them being a "granny" enough to imply they're female?

I realize I’m being somewhat pedantic here — and if I really wanted to ‘’um, actually’’ myself I’d say that “she/her” pronouns do not necessarily mean female — but my point is that when a toy-only character whose tiny bio neglects to mention any pronouns or gender indicators, we try to make sure their page reflects that and doesn’t assume them to be male or a he, even if that might have been the intention or assumption of the creators of the time. Should the same thing be done in these cases?

If we're going by the rule of, “It was 198x! of course a bot with zero kibble, a skinny, rounded/hourglass shape, and/or lipstick is female", what is the justification for bots like one of the Early war history records Transformers under Honorable Mentions, or one of Maccadam's bartenders? The former mentions "a hip structure and way of moving that suggest that it is female”, but I don’t see anything Arcee-y about them. I’m not saying they can’t be female and look like that! Just that if the “198x clause” (whose use, to be clear, I'm not advocating for) is used to argue that a bot is female, this seems to fall short of that.

Please note, this is not coming from a desire to gatekeep what is and isn't feminine enough. In fact, my reasoning for bringing a lot of this up is ‘’because’’ assuming that because someone has a cinched waist or big chest or lipstick they're female or use she/her pronouns feels reductive to me. My point is, when it comes to the wiki and trying to maintain accuracy, it feels like a stretch to call a random background character — that doesn't look any more discernible as female than the one next to them and has no notes in the script or even any word of god denoting their intention to be female — female. I don't think they should be assumed male, either (see above), but why include them on this list? Additionally, when does the 198x clause run out? The 90s had much of the same attitude, and though it’s gotten a bit better with the passing years, we haven’t exactly reached the peak of diversity and understanding of the gender spectrum in the following 20+ years.

I am glad to be corrected on any of this information — in my noting of what seems to be assumptions made by others, I very well may have made some of my own, or else just have been ignorant to certain info. And again, it’s not my intention to shear chunks of potential representation from the list. I’m the type who will take any opportunity to point to the tiniest piece of media and say, “Look! Bumblebee and Optimus Prime are canonically female _{in at least one continuity}!” But how that’s determined is worth examining, I think. A suggestion below:

What is the criteria for inclusion on the list proper?

• At least one of the following:
  • The use of female, girl, woman, femme, fembot, etc. in reference to them (without them disputing it)
  • The use of she/her pronouns in reference to them (without correction)
  • Prior consistent depiction of the character as female in other continuities
• Was a (female) Transformer/Cybertronian in at least one continuity

What is the criteria for inclusion on the Honorable Mentions list?

• At least one of the following:
  • Female robot, but not of the Transformer/Cybertronian species
  • Stereotypically feminine features or a shared mold/body type with one or more female Transformers, but not confirmed female themselves

Do I kinda hate that this is something I feel the need to ask?

• Yes, but I also think this page is worth having, and thus needs defining

Ashendawn (talk) 23:31, 1 October 2024 (EDT)