Talk:Nemesis Prime (G1)

Alternators

So, does the japanese version of it contain Die Cast or not?

Well, in a few months when you can buy one, let us know! --ItsWalky 01:23, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Nit pick

Nit-picky: I don't think he becomes Nemesis Prime/Black Convoy until the spark is put in him. Therefore, "Now, as Nemesis Prime, he returned to Arkeville's lair," wouldn't be true. Actually, the story explicitly stated he is under the control of AI programming, and was only named after Arkeville connected him to the evil life force. But, like I said, that's a nit pick.

What I really don't like is calling that other guy Vector Prime. For me, it's too great a leap. Just my thoughts. --Crockalley 21:32, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

War Within origin?

If this G1 Nemesis Prime is man -made, what about "The War Within" Nemesis Prime from the Titanium Series?--Autobotx1010 21:00, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Having never seen the packaging and bio, I couldn't speculate. However it's worth noting that Arkeville never appeared in Dreamwave continuity, and thus Dreamwave continuity is not Alternators continuity. In other words, a "War Within" Nemesis Prime would be solidly in the Dreamwave-verse, and thus have no bearing on Alternators.--Rosicrucian 21:41, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Sunstorm and Ricochet are clones in Dreamwave continuity, and not in others. Thus it's difficult to say what kind of status a Dreamwave Nemesis Prime would have based on his status in other continuities.

If I had to guess, I'd ssay they'd place him as part of Age of Wrath with all the other clones runnign around, so clone is likely, bu by no means assured. -Derik 22:59, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Alternity

Translations of the "super-black" version of Alternity Convoy heavily imply that he's Binaltech Nemesis Prime, as well as Nemesis Prime (Universe 2003). Presumably this works out rather well, because the timeline that birthed the Alternity into the multiverse was the Binaltech one, which is also the one where Universe Nemesis Prime's spark got infused into Binaltech Nemesis Prime's body.--Rosicrucian^Talk 03:16, 4 July 2009 (EDT)

But, if he was created from a fragment of Uni Nemesis' cloned spark, that just makes him a clone whose spark was born from Uni Nemesis, rather than being the same individual. I mean, Uni Nemesis is a clone of a Prime from a destroyed universe...it's all rather head turning really User:Eire 21.29 July 21 (UTC)

Uh... I know that we've seen instances of sparks being split in the past, but I'm blanking on where. (Dinobot II doesn't really count, he had external datatraxs.) -Derik 16:42, 21 July 2009 (EDT)

Where are we getting that this is a fragment, not the whole spark?--Rosicrucian^Talk 16:48, 21 July 2009 (EDT)

Where are we getting anything that says Nemesis was born from having an entire spark transferred by Unicron? User:Eire 21.49 July 21 (UTC)

What does that have to do with what I just asked? I mean, you seem to be assuming he's a clone of a clone, when that doesn't seem supported by the source material. The second spark within the Binaltech body could well have been Nemesis Prime's in full.--Rosicrucian^Talk 17:01, 21 July 2009 (EDT)

The "fragment" bit is from the unsourced Forest Lee statement down in the trivia section of this page, which I believe he said at a BotCon? That's the only bit that specifically ties Binaltech (well, Alternators) Nemesis Prime to Universe Nemmy; the actual Binaltech story didn't draw so specfic a connection, but did imply Unicron's hand in the proceedings. As Eire says, he (BT Nemmy) doesn't seem to be precisely the same entity as Universe/Alternity NP. Nothing is actually leaping out at me from the translated story that explicitly hints he's Binaltech Nemesis Prime, anyway. - Chris McFeely 17:46, 21 July 2009 (EDT)

Maaaaan, having two franchises called "Universe" can be damn confusing. Okay, so I've read a translation of Alternity Super-Black Convoy's bio, and the only reference I'm getting out of that is to 2003-Universe NP. I am seriously not at all seeing any implication, heavy or otherwise, that he's Binaltech Black Convoy or Alternators NP. Could someone please explain what I'm missing? - Jackpot 16:35, 3 August 2009 (EDT)

Ichikawa wrote Binaltech, and the second spark that was housed in Binaltech Nemesis Prime's body was that of the 2003 Universe Nemesis Prime. Alternity is a continuation of Binaltech in many ways, and seems to be written by Ichikawa as well. Our current translation Heavily parallels the events of Binaltech, and the eventual destruction of Binaltech Nemesis Prime.--Rosicrucian^Talk 16:43, 3 August 2009 (EDT)

What is the evidence that Binaltech Black Convoy (I'm using the Japanese name to try to keep all these incarnations straight) got 2003-Universe NP's spark? Reading a translation of the story where that happens, the source of BC's new life is vague in the extreme. I don't know where to find translations of his continued story, but this article's summary doesn't suggest anything more about his origin. I'm also not seeing how Alternity SBC's bio "heavily parallels" Binaltech BC's story. All it says is that he fought a fierce battle with the Cybertrons (I'm assuming that means "Autobots"?) and was defeated, which is pretty much what happened to 2003-Universe NP too. Of course, I'm assuming that Binaltech didn't have a 900,000-year flash-forward... - Jackpot 16:56, 3 August 2009 (EDT)

To be more specific, Alternity Nemesis Prime's bio implies that he was specifically reformed in the same timeline that the Alternity originated from, the "BT World." This makes the Alternity bio kind of a missing link here, because we now have a clear timeline of Megazarak destroying the Optimus Prime of his world, Unicron rebuilding him and giving him the Dead Matrix, him being destroyed in the Unicron, his spark being harnessed by Arkeville, and then destroyed again in the Binaltech timeline and apparently rehabilitated in the span of time it took that universe to birth the Alternity. The 900,000 years figure is the same one mentioned in the other Alternity fiction.--Rosicrucian^Talk 17:14, 3 August 2009 (EDT)

How does it imply that SBC came from the BT World? It starts out in an explicitly alternate universe (one that sounds not-coincidentally like the one 2003-Universe NP came from), SBC loses a battle in a nonspecific place and time, and then he is "inducted into the Convoy collective 900,000 years in the future, where the Alternity is located." Since the Alternity transcends universal streams, a character could come in contact with it from presumably anywhere in the multiverse. In fact, if the "Convoy collective" is referring to the Convoy Aggregate, then you're saying that every one of those Convoys must have come from the BT World, which I thought was either in doubt or expressedly wrong. - Jackpot 18:28, 3 August 2009 (EDT)

I think this might need a re-translation. Just to make sure... --Lonegamer78 19:05, 3 August 2009 (EDT)

Alt/BT versus Classics

So we can agree that Alternators/Binaltech NP has some portion of Universe NP's spark, but they each have their own article on this wiki. Now, why would Classics NP be here on this article when his bio shares no connection at all to Alt/BT NP? It just seems funny that the two who share a spark are considered different characters, but Dr. Arkeville's clone and Straxus' twisted soldier are considered the same character. --Crockalley 09:10, 1 August 2009 (EDT)

There had been a discussion about this some while back, but I think it got lost in the crash. The logic was, the Alternators/Binaltech character and the Universe Classic Series character are both evil black-and-teal Prime clones in the G1 continuity family, so they should share an article. Just as, for instance, IDW Galvatron is in the same article with (most of) the other G1 Galvies that came before him, despite his unique origin. The connection you're suggesting between Binaltech Black Convoy and 2003-Universe NP is new to me. Does it have to do with the Alternity discussion up above? - Jackpot 16:42, 3 August 2009 (EDT)

Yes, the first post of the above discussion mentions it. Also, the trivia sections of Nemesis Prime (Universe 2003) and Nemesis Prime (G1) mention it. It's the whole "Arkeville tapped into an extra-spatial source, which Forrest Lee says is Unicron, who gave Arkeville a piece of Universe NP's spark" thing. Thus, a connection between Alt/BT NP and 2003-Universe NP. I wouldn't really consider then the same character, but in my mind, they share a stronger connection to each other than Alt/BT NP and Universe Classic Series NP. To counter your point about Galvatron, I present Galvatron II. -Crockalley 17:53, 4 August 2009 (EDT)

Ah, I forgot about Forest's alleged comment. I'm.... not inclined to give much weight at all to unconfirmed hearsay about off-the-cuff author-commentary. Besides, the story of Alternators NP is somewhat different from Binaltech BC, so I'm not sure how to apply that even if it WAS canon. If that's the best evidence we have of any connection between 2003-Universe NP and Alternators NP - and as far as I can tell, it is - then I don't think there's sufficient reason to change the articles around.

As for Galvy II, I don't see how the reason that that article exists pertains at all to this situation, nor how it invalidates the IDW-Galvy analogy.

- Jackpot 21:05, 4 August 2009 (EDT)

In regards to the Nemesis Prime issue, I guess I concede. It just doesn't feel very good to me having two characters who have very different backgrounds on the same page, but I guess there's a bunch of pages like that here. As for Galvatron, I was trying to say that Galvatron II has pretty much the same origin as Galvatron I, both are from a G1 universe, they're clearly based on the same character template, yet separate pages. I mean, if we're going to keep someone as different as IDW Galvatron on the Galvatron page, why does Galvatron II (who is so similar to Galvatron I by compariaon to IDW Galvatron), get his own page? Wait, I finally understand your first Galvatron analogy: two completely different characters who share the same page, just like Nemesis Prime (G1). Can you possibly understand my confusion? --Crockalley 22:59, 4 August 2009 (EDT)

I totally understand where you're coming from; the current setup does seem intuitively... off. But it actually does make sense, and I'm glad that I've been able to explain that clearly. For what it's worth, if any official material ever actually connects Binaltech BC with 2003-Universe NP, then I'll be much more amenable to rearranging the articles.

The logic behind Galvatron II as a separate article is actually the opposite of what's happening here: Because there are two versions of Galvy running around in the same comic series, each doing big stuff, any attempt to document both them in the same article would be confusing and unnecessarily difficult. Given that one of the Galvys even has a unique official name ("Galvatron II" shows up in The Ultimate Guide and some e-Hobby stuff), making a second article is clearly preferable.

Meanwhile, IDW Galvy is lumped into the primary Galvatron article because he's in the same continuity family and has the same name, same general appearance, and same basic role as a character, but unlike Galvy II, he's safely confined to his own series. Splitting hairs on origins is a dangerous road to go down, since every incarnation of a given character is going to be somewhat different from the rest, and with so many variations within a continuity-family as sprawling as G1, we have to allow some give so everything doesn't end up a judgement call.

At least, that's the status quo. I've actually argued for less "give" in certain cases, but it seems that the wiki trends toward inclusion.

- Jackpot 12:07, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

Move?

This article just got moved from Nemesis Prime (G1) to Nemesis Prime (Alternators) with a memo stating: None of the Nemesis Primes (Nemeses Prime?) in this article were actually in the G1 franchise, just Alternators/Binaltech, Universe, and arguably Classics.

... Alternators, Binaltech, Universe 2008 and Classics are all (G1) continuities. What you smokin'? -Derik 13:56, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

Not to mention that Classicsverse Nemesis Prime really doesn't belong here if this is to be the Alternators character.--Rosicrucian^Talk 14:01, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

Disambigs are by franchise of origin. The franchises that apply here are all part of the G1 continuity family, NOT the G1 franchise. This character originated in Alternators, then another version of the same essential dude appeared in Classics (via Universe). They belong on the same page in the same way that IDW Galvatron belongs on Galvatron (G1) (as described above), disambiguated by the franchise-of-origin, which is Alternators. - Jackpot 15:05, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

Except that (G1) was the most narrow parenthetical which applied to all the toys in that umbrella article. Seeing as it contained non Alternators characters who were wholly unrelated to Alternators, that was a very bad choice for a move. So at this point, splitting out Classicsverse Nemesis Prime was a necessity.--Rosicrucian^Talk 15:09, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

...oh for Christ's sake Jackpot, you just made it worse.--Rosicrucian^Talk 15:10, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

I'm assuming you mean the first undo. I don't know what went wrong with that; I've fixed to be fully back to the state before Derik started moving stuff around. And... here's the thing. The whole "most narrow parenthetical" logic is exactly what Jeysie was trying to suggest in that giant debate on parentheticals we had a while back, and not only did the mob shout her down, but her own experiments on the matter revealed that it opens up way too many cans of worms on all sorts of articles. The conclusion was that the job of a parenthetical is NOT to encapsulate the full scope of the character; it's to keep same-name articles separate based on a simple rule. The rule is franchise-of-origin, and NP never appeared under the G1 franchise, so there you go. Unless you're counting the unreleased Titatium toy as the G1 franchise... which I squint at because it was, y'know, never released, and even if it was, wouldn't it be War Within, not G1? - Jackpot 15:27, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

I'd say the ideal thing is still to split out Classicsverse NP, if we're going to use this rationale. Then we can debate over whether Alternators/Binaltech NP should merge with Universe 2003 NP. It sidesteps the major issue with you moving the article to the Alternators parenthetical.--Rosicrucian^Talk 15:42, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

I'm not... wholly against that idea, but I dislike it because I think that I've convincingly argued each of these points, and the only reason left to do things differently is that the logical result doesn't "feel" right to some people. JACKPOT HATES FEELINGS GRRARR. Also, having three separate NP articles will just make people think, "Hey, maybe we should combine the Alternators one with Nemesis Prime (Universe 2003) to make things neater," which is another blow against reason. But, just because I dislike it, doesn't mean I'm opposed to it. It's not the worst outcome, and if a three-article solution makes everybody basically happy, then I won't put up a fight. - Jackpot 16:03, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

I'm saying this mainly because moving to the Alternators parenthetical breaks the original premise of sticking all the G1 continuity family NPs together, which was why we originally ended up at this namespace. If we split that out and stick it at (G1) or at (Universe 2008), then we're on more solid footing and the debate can proceed without distractions.--Rosicrucian^Talk 16:06, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

I hear what you're saying about the debate and distractions. I was hoping we could reach conclusions soon and that render that point moot, but I guess we'll see. As to your other point, though, changing the parenthetical doesn't actually affect the scope of the article. If it did, then we'd have to use titles like "Optimus Prime (UT)" instead of Optimus Prime (Armada). I mean, in principle, YES, I'd love it if our parentheticals could more accurately reflect our article content, and I've long thought that the UT cases were a perfect example of how counterintuitive our system can be. But the problem is that continuity-families (which are the default basis of ALL of our articles, special exceptions aside) don't all have nice, straightforward, easily-abbreviated, well-recognized, official names. If they were all as clean as "UT", I'd be pushing for that as our parenthetical standard instead, big time. But until some new terms fall into our laps from heaven, the lesser of the evils is to live with the disconnect between continuity-family-based articles and franchise-of-origin-based parentheticals. - Jackpot 16:32, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

I could be mature about this, but I'm not going to be, because

1. I think you're being a fool
2. You reverted my edits, which were inline with Merge templates that have been up for over a month.
3. I'm cheezed by your bad behavior over at the Shattered Glass disambig vote.
4. Even if you put all that aside, the move to "Nemesis Prime (Alternators)" was totally ass-tarded.

At some point int he future, Universe 2003 Nemesis Prime's spark is purified and turned into a force for good. (I can't find a source for this offhand, but it's the one piee of backstory no one is debating, so let's just assume it's true for a moment.)

A mysterious spark known only as the "Protector" emerged from the chronal chaos and possessed the body of Nemesis Prime created by Doctor Arkeville [...] Unfortunately, Nemesis Prime's programming soon overrode the Protector's spark, forcing it from his body{{#if:|{{{quote2}}}}}{{#if:Alternators Nemesis Prime bio|Alternators Nemesis Prime bio{{#if:|, {{{3}}}|}}|}}

In the "Alternity" timeline that resulted from all of Binaltech's time-monkeying, That spark travels back and possesses the evil body created by Dr. Archaeville, but is eventually forced out.

With this crisis averted, the Autobots began focusing their efforts on the Protector, attempting to give him a Binaltech body, while also conducting the Timaeus Project at his direction to create the substance known as "Alternium", which would be important for the future he had foretold. [...] A strike by the Autobots prevented the [sparkless Nemesis Prime] from carrying out his horrible scheme, and during the final battle, the Protector merged with Optimus Prime, increasing his strength to the point that he was able to destroy Nemesis Prime.{{#if:|{{{quote2}}}}}{{#if:Binaltech Nemesis Prime bio|Binaltech Nemesis Prime bio{{#if:|, {{{3}}}|}}|}}

The Autobots were workign on buildign a new body for the Protector's spark. Clearly the suceeded because...

A native of the same universe that birthed the Alternity, Megatron had fallen into stasis lock during the conflicts which led to the Timaeus Project.{{#if:|{{{quote2}}}}}{{#if:"To Mega Therion"|"To Mega Therion"{{#if:|, {{{3}}}|}}|}}

[Megatron claimed] that Nemesis Prime has gone soft since joining the Alternity.{{#if:|{{{quote2}}}}}{{#if:"Arch-Nemesis!"|"Arch-Nemesis!"{{#if:|, {{{3}}}|}}|}}

The Megatron explicitly native to the Alternity continuity has clashed with Nemesis Prime since before' Nemesis Prime joined the multiple-body-across-diimensions-squad, ergo this is all so the NP of this universe. In case you thought there was room for ambiguity, "Arch-Nemesis!" explicitly identifies him as The Protector too.

One spark. Same guy. Single continuity. Continuous chain of events.

Unless you can come up with a really good argument why I shouldn't, I'm revering these articles back. You have 5 minutes. -Derik 18:59, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

Um, Derik? The Protector is Optimus Primal. - Chris McFeely 19:02, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

Really? Nemesis Prime has Optimus Primal's apark?

I ask because of both Binaltech bios calling that spark "The Protector," and his alternity bio identifying him as "Protector E7" right off the bat.

Please clarify this statement. -Derik 19:18, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

I... erm... what? Derik, I think you may have your wires crossed. The spark which comes back in time and possesses the lifeless Nemesis Prime body, and is then ejected from it, is Optimus Primal. This is implicitly stated in the final Binaltech story chapter, when the Protector's spark fuses with Optimus Prime, and Prime remembers the same thing happening in the past, when the Protector saved his life before (referencing "Optimal Situation"). Prime proceeds to drop the "seeds of the future" quote, and destroys Nemesis Prime (who by this stage has a spark of his own) by using Primal's patented energy-absorption-and-redirection move from Beast Machines. And Alternity Nemesis Prime is NOT Protector E-7 - THIS is Protector E-7, what appears to be Elita One's consciousness in a synthoid body. "Protector" is not an individual - is a title shared by multiple servants of the Alternity, of which Optimus Primal is just one. - Chris McFeely 19:24, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

You are misreading, Derik. Protector E-7 is a separate character. There is more than one Protector, and Optimus Primal was the one in Binaltech. He inhabited Nemesis Prime's body, but was later driven out and replaced by Universe 2003 Nemesis Prime's spark.--Rosicrucian^Talk 19:22, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

Ugh. Whatever. The point is he's dead and the matrix died with him!

It's the same continuity anyway. (Seriously, can I take a bat to whoever thought it was cute to have two mysterious time-traveling sparks with god-like benefactors, both skip backward-and-sidways-in-time to and posses the same goddamn body?)

Is this Forrest Lee's fault? >:( -Derik 19:29, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

It's more Ichikawa's fault, but it gets kind of chicken and egg. It mostly looks like Ichikawa took the somewhat sparse bit that Lee wrote for Alternators Nemesis Prime, since it was an homage to Ichikawa's Binaltech work, and found a way to incorporate it into the ongoing Binaltech fiction he was writing. He then referenced it more definitely in the Alternity character's bio. Ain't Transformers fiction grandly inbred?--Rosicrucian^Talk 19:43, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

But I don't want to beat up Ichikawa-kun! I want to beat up Forrest Lee! -Derik 11:44, 6 August 2009 (EDT)

Well if you really wanted to I guess you could beat up Lee for homaging him, thus forcing him to homage Lee back.--Rosicrucian^Talk 12:12, 6 August 2009 (EDT)

Tick-tock. Quick question. I thought The Protector was believed to be either BW Primal or a counterpart of his? User:Eire 00.06 Aug 6 09 (UTC)

I don't know what you mean by all the Protector stuff. All I'm seeing in your argument is that the Binaltech-native Alternity Megatron said that NP had "gone soft since joining the Alternity." This could mean that they had clashed in the pre-Alternity (and therefore Binaltech) realm, but not necessarily. If I'm understanding this right, Megatron was nigh-omniscient at that point; he could've been well aware of how evil 2003-Universe NP had been in his own universe (or the UT). Yeah, it sounds like cliched so-we-meet-again dialogue, but that's bringing your own interpretation into it. Even if they HAD met before, maybe Megatron had fought with 2003-Universe NP at some point in his ascension. There are too many unknowns to base any conclusions off of. - Jackpot 19:15, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

Dodge Ram Nemesis and Mammoth Nemesis

Okay, I managed to dig up the specific quote from Forest Lee regarding the relationship between Alternators Nemesis Prime and Universe 2003 Nemesis Prime. This was relayed by a friend who was e-mailing him at the time.

My thought when I wrote that bio was that Arkeville tapped into this exta-dimensional power source without having a full understanding of what it was. If Binaltech is a continuation, it's probably of the original Marvel universe, right? So Arkeville might have thought he had hooked up with the Negative Zone or some similarly unpleasant place, when in fact he had connected to the pocket dimension that serves as Unicron's battery.

Unicron basically fed Arkeville exactly what he needed (and maybe even somehow subtly directed Arkeville's hand during the entire construction of N. Prime), which is basically a Spark fragment or whatever from his own work at cloning Optimus Prime (which ended with the creation of Universe Nemesis Prime).

So Arkeville thinks he's got his own private well of power from which to potentially build an army of Transformer soldiers, when in reality what he's doing is empowering a soldier for Unicron.

With this in mind — ignoring Forest's notion that Binaltech was a continuation of the Marvel comics continuity — it does not seem that the two Nemesis Primes were meant to be the same character, just that their origins were related (after a fashion). Ergo, I feel that the two separate pages, as currently written, are how they should remain. --Monzo 18:43, 6 August 2009 (EDT)

Awesome, thank you for the info. Whichever way it turns out, it's just good to get the facts straight. Do you know which was written first, Lee's bio or Ichikawa's? - Jackpot 15:05, 7 August 2009 (EDT)

Stellar Converter

Since the reason given for the removal was invalid (it was removed for not being a reference, but it wasn't part of the references section) I reverted it. If there is a real problem please contact me. 68.61.240.172 08:30, 12 November 2009 (EST)

The reason is, it has nothing to do with anything. I could add that Nemesis was the baddie from Robotix and it would have just as much place on this page. The fact that his gun shares its name with something else is not notable and shouldn't be included in the article unless it was a deliberate reference. - Chris McFeely 08:32, 12 November 2009 (EST)

Nemesis Prime no Nippon doko?

Whetever happened to the Japanese exclusive (Wonderfest? Winterfest?) Classics mold that was suppposed to have red translucent parts instead of blue? Is this fig still pending, cancelled, or is it a different Nemesis Prime? In general, Nemesi Prime navigation is a bit difficult. Some of these toys could use mold disambig pages, as opposed to; or rather, in addition to, character disambigs. This is a Prime (cough) example of the toy being less complicated than the bot who is distinguished from his identical counterpart from the universe that turns out to be the same universe in the first place, who later travels to the future from the future, and posessess himself. Causality be damned. Hida Atarasi 15:41, 11 July 2010 (EDT)

Main Picture

How about changing the main pic to his Transformers Legends appearance, it's much cooler looking and seems more appropriate for a "G1" article. The current one seems rather bland and dosen't really contrast with Optimus G1. (I would have changed it myself, but I don't know how. ) SoundWave 19:23, 8 October 2013 (EDT)

The Alternator's picture is his first body, so it's staying. Escargon 19:25, 8 October 2013 (EDT)

Could we at least add it in the Legends section? SoundWave 19:28, 8 October 2013 (EDT)

Yes, you can add it too the Legends section. Escargon 19:31, 8 October 2013 (EDT)

For completeness, make sure to include his alt mode. --Inkblot 19:33, 8 October 2013 (EDT)

Could someone link me to a page that explains how to upload a picture? SoundWave 19:36, 8 October 2013 (EDT)

Marvel Comics?

That's a joke, right? Or is this some Allspark Almanac/TFCC fiction sort of deal where that guy who's been there since September 1984 is retroactively declared to have been a guy who conceptually wouldn't exist for another twenty years all along? -hx 10:45, 4 November 2013 (EST)

Yeah, I'm preeeeeetty sure that shouldn't be there. -LV 11:01, 4 November 2013 (EST)

Well, it appears SanityOrMadness added it, so they're probably the person to ask after about it. Jalaguy 11:25, 4 November 2013 (EST)

Twas added by him back around when he was also trying to claim that Earthforce was the main continuity of the UK comics instead of the reprinted US issues. That thing is gone. --Sabrblade 11:59, 4 November 2013 (EST)

It's pretty simple. Look at all the other guys that get incorporated without being named. This is a [Marvel 80s-style] black Decepticon Optimus Prime. We're calling the Necrotitan in Dark Cybertron the Zone Metrotitan despite the colour scheme not perfectly matching. Occam's Razor is that this is [retroactively] Nemesis Prime. - SanityOrMadness 17:35, 8 November 2013 (EST)

That is a nice thought, but it still doesn't sound quite legit. There is also this to consider: The The Transformers (issue) page calls all those weird generic Transformers "errors," so it stands to reason that it is TFWiki's position that they did not actually exist. (There was no black Optimus Prime-y Decepticon in the attack—he was just an art error.) I'm not sure I necessarily buy that. I think all those generics probably could have died beyond repair in the attack or crash landing. But that seems to be the wiki's position. - Gimmick 18:15, 8 November 2013 (EST)

Funny, I see a red, silver, pink and black Optimus Prime. Until some official source retroactively declares it to be NP, there's no reason to treat it as anything other than just another art error in an issue that's brimming with them. -- Repowers 02:20, 9 November 2013 (EST)

I don't see how Occam's Razor can produce such a conclusion as "retroactive Nemesis Prime" especially since not all black Optimuses Prime are automatically Nemesises Prime anyway. --KilMichaelMcC 08:56, 9 November 2013 (EST)

Considering we're not claiming the Necrotitan is Zone Metrotitan anymore, after checking with the creators, then I'd say the last leg this had to stand on is gone. As Hoop said, the very concept of Nemesis Prime didn't exist at the time this was printed.--Rosicrucian^Talk 07:40, 9 November 2013 (EST)

Yokohama Convoy

Would the Nemesis Prime in the Yokohama comic technically be not the same entity as the Black Convoy that exists elsewhere in JG1 continuity? (Specifically, Masterpiece Black Convoy.) Saix (talk) 21:43, 13 December 2015 (EST)

POTP Nemesis Convoy

Do we know he belongs on this page? He's, uh, got some Armada stuff going on. --ItsWalky (talk) 23:55, 2 April 2018 (EDT)

Eh, it's really a guess at this point. Considering his body is more G1 than Armada and POTP being a G1-centric line, it is a fair guess he belongs here. --westjames/notirishman (talk) 09:27, 3 April 2018 (EDT)

We could always.... wait for more information before putting things on the site. --ItsWalky (talk) 23:24, 3 April 2018 (EDT)

Mighty Mugs

Okay, so I noticed that the mighty mugs figure has blue eyes. This wouldn't be so weird, except that his face (well, faces) is different from the one for optimus. I mean, to my knowledge, no other version of Nemmy has blue eyes. Were they originally gonna use these for another character, or did they just want to spice things up for this? I'm so confused. I mainly ask so I know if it's worth mentioning in that part of the page or not.Metalstar (talk) 13:05, 14 April 2020 (EDT)

Possible Toys page?

Nemesis Prime has amassed quite the sum of toys in the past years, and I think there’s enough to give them their own page, especially because that section is longer than the rest of the fiction section. Brickmaster57 (talk) 15:57, 18 May 2023 (EDT)

Nah. There's not *that* many toys compared to some of the other pages that were split off, and all that would leave us with is a much teenier fiction-focused page. It's fine as is. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 16:16, 18 May 2023 (EDT)

Sorry to bring up this dead horse again lol, but given he has 20 toy entries and a metric ton of merchandise when characters like G1 Powerglide, G1 Blurr, and G1 Springer have only 11, 9, and 13 toys respectively (and not much merchandise) do get their own pages, I think it’s quite silly to say he doesn’t have “*that* much” to qualify. Besides, his fictional appearances still leave a quite substantial page on their own. It’s not user friendly at all to have it all on one long article. Brickmaster57 (talk) 22:09, 13 October 2023 (EDT)

Toy-page splits are not simply a "number of toys" thing. It's about overall page size/cumbersomeness, and Nemmy does not remotely qualify in that regard. We split out not because one part has reached some arbitrary size, but because the entire page is too big, which is not just a readability thing but a loading issues thing, and something needs to split out to alleviate that. And those examples you brought up very likely happened when someone went around doing a LOT of toypage splitting that on pages that didn't need them and we just never got around to reverting all of them (which we did for quite a few). We don't want to make readers link-jump if they don't have to. --M Sipher (talk) 22:31, 13 October 2023 (EDT)

Know what? While we're at it... why is the Gallery split into a separate page and not just under Notes? Why are we making people link-jump for a whopping six images? Seems pointless. --M Sipher (talk) 22:53, 13 October 2023 (EDT)

Alright, I get it now. Btw, I SEVERELY misread your response lmao. Sorry for calling you an ass, have a nice day! Brickmaster57 (talk) 23:37, 13 October 2023 (EDT)