Talk:Omega Supreme (Animated)

Ship Name: Orion

According to AA2, p. 82, Omega Supreme's ship name is "Orion". Barring objections, I'll get started on the appropriate moves and edits. JW 14:03, 15 July 2010 (EDT)

Maybe we should fold this into Omega Supreme's article now. It isn't exactly spoilerific anymore. Omega Supreme's page could note that the ship itself was called "Teletran-1" in the adaptation, "Omega Supreme" in the Almanac, and "Orion" in Almanac II. - Starfield 14:27, 15 July 2010 (EDT)

I'm not going to weigh in on the idea of Teletran or Orion, but I do think that we may well be past the spoiler phase of Animated. Merging the articles seems sensible to me.--Jimsorenson 02:24, 16 July 2010 (EDT)

Trivia about Transwarping

If I recall correctly, Omega Supreme's transwarping ability was caused by the uncontrollable transwarping... thing that Bulkhead built in S2 and was the focus of S3's Transwarped. Trivia doesn't need that wondering tidbit. Gearshift 09:49, 29 November 2009 (EST)

No, Omega was seen transwarping in the "TransWarped" 3-parter, before the plasmadynamic thruster was completed and placed on him. - Chris McFeely 09:57, 29 November 2009 (EST)

Talk:Autobot ship (Animated)

Was this rename really justified? As someone who was at that panel, Isenberg said the ship wasn't the Ark, but Derrick Wyatt insisted it was, and last year Hasbro said it was too. --Thylacine 2000 05:36, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

• Plus, didn't they say the ship's name in the very first episode? Jedi Wolf 16:44, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

The more I see this the more I hate it. As I mentioned, there is no actual reason for the name change: Seibertron's account is misleading. The original person who made the change should have put it up for discussion ahead of time; God knows we went back and forth enough about "Galvatron's (mother)ship". The current title is inferior and should be changed back. Does anyone DISAGREE with that, and if so, based on what? --Thylacine 2000 17:42, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Do we have anything in canon calling this ship "the Ark"? —Interrobang 06:16, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Not within the series, just like there's nothing in the series calling the 'con ship Nemesis. It all came from Hasbro in '07. --Thylacine 2000 13:47, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

The Decepticon ship being the Nemesis has a bit more confirmation than that now, as seen in the bit of the new Animated comic script that was released here. --KilMichaelMcC 15:33, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

writer > artist. IMO, things should only ever be given a name they've explicitly been referred to in the fiction in question. Behind the scenes stuff, or the name it got in some other continuity shouldn't count for anything more than trivia. - SanityOrMadness 20:56, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

That is a laudable ideal- but we use behind the scenes names for unnamed character all the time, because otherwise you'd have articles named "Unnamed Autobot 214". -75.168.112.43 00:48, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

In the comic adaptation of Animated episode 2, the term "Teletran-1" refers to the ship as a whole. It's used in narration several times, some more ambiguous than others, but the clincher is "Underneath the sea, on Teletran-1..." (I don't know if the use of the term "sea" casts doubt on the veracity of the narration, but there it is.) - Jackpot 18:26, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

In that case, I support renaming the article as such. I think it's clear the ship's name really was Ark given the model sheet, but if actual public media uses a different name, that should take precedence, with Ark put in as trivia.--Thylacine 2000 18:48, 4 May 2008 (UTC).

Pretty clear case for a merge with "Teletran 1", I'd say. It's canon.--Rosicrucian^Talk 18:54, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

New information says that we might not want to do that just yet... -- SFH 23:50, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

The only spoilers I've seen are just images. While certainly they imply a future retitling, they don't change the question of whether this article and "Teletran 1" should be merged. Given the only facts we have, the ship and its computer seem to be considered one and the same. This may well remain true after "A Bridge Too Close," if perhaps under a different name. - Jackpot 06:45, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Bridge Too Close

...oh joy, so apparently the Season 2 finale which has just leaked to Dubai has spoilers about this too.--Rosicrucian^Talk 00:09, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah...so what do we do now? Move the page to conform to the new information and spoil it for everyone else? Or do we revert and censor until A Bridge Too Close airs? -- SFH 00:32, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Having this at the "proper" article title would be as bad a situation as when we jumped the gun and started making Elita-1 redirects the day "Along Came a Spider" aired. It's a big spoiler.--Rosicrucian^Talk 00:39, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I vote for either protecting *ALL* Animated character pages, or setting them to be untouchable by anonymous editors, or both. I'm fucking sick of dubbed scuttlebutt killing the first story developments worth a damn we've had in 9 years. Almost nobody has actually legitimately seen these episodes; most people are just wanking over screenshots and summaries. Let's really try to keep as free of it as possible, is my vote. --Thylacine 2000 01:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Far be it from me to suggest following Wikipedia's lead, but one thing that other wiki does to stop massive edit wars or mass-vandalism on specific articles, an admin will lock the page to anon user and new accounts with instructions posted at the top of the article to leave a message on the talk page if you are unable to make a valid edit. We could save ourselves a bunch of time (and from being spoiled) by putting a similar block on the involved pages and put up a template that says something like the following:

Does Prime die? (goes best with screencap from commercial)

The subject of this article is involved with major spoilers in fiction not yet available in major markets. To avoid spoiling people, editing for anonymous users and new accounts has been disabled. If you are unable made a non-spoiler edit to this page, please leave a message describing the edit to be made on this article's talk page. --FortMax 01:44, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

McFeely semi-protected Sari's page after my recommendation (and a major spoiler was added) so I guess we should probably do that as well. -- SFH 02:00, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I like FortMax's idea...perhaps we should extend this to all of the episodes that thus far have not aired in English-speaking countries, as well. --Professor Icepick 02:48, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I endorse FortMax's idea wholeheartedly. This wiki should not be a breeding ground for rampant spoilers. -- Repowers 03:00, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Here's what I've managed to tool up. I've made it garishly yellow to draw attention to it. {{SemiprotectSpoilers}} Whaddaya think?--Rosicrucian^Talk 03:03, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

That...is awesome. --Professor Icepick 03:08, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Perfect --FortMax 03:16, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

What they said. *two thumbs up* -- Repowers 03:20, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Don't think it could be better. --Sntint 03:40, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

...but if you really want a consensus, a page that people may avoid on sight of the title may not be the best place to test it out? I don't really think anyone will have a problem with it, anyway. --Sntint 03:42, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I hate to jump on the bandwagon, but I dig it.--AWT88 03:48, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

FIRE AT WILL. If it's not too much of a hassle, can this be done for ALL Animated character / vehicle / object / beyond-Canada episode pages? Maybe something important has already happened to the AllSpark and nobody has blabbed about it yet, but will decide to next week; why continue to basically force some staff members to be on Spoiler Reading Patrol, when we can just nip all problems in the bud? --Thylacine 2000 17:44, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Teletran-1

Oh, come on! If you've seen the 20th Anniversary Collectors Edition (which I'm sure you have), then you know that that isn't the right line. 209.244.43.211 17:30, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

...what? --Steve-o 05:01, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

"Oh, snap! What are we going to do now?". That isn't the line. The line is "Oh, shit! What are we going to do now?". Spike's exact words in the movie. 209.247.23.42 20:20, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

So? --M Sipher 20:27, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

So, I've fixed it. 209.247.23.41 19:38, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

So what now?

The Alspark Almanac clearly states that Teletraan-1 is not the anme of the ship, the ship is just referred to as Omega Supreme while Teletraan1 is just the AI computer. Shpuld we merge this article with Omega Supreme or rename it to Autobot Ship?Dead Metal 07:54, 2 October 2009 (EDT)

Well, the ship is Omega Supreme obviously. How was the AllSpark Almanac presented? It is an in-fiction after-the-fact reporting of events I think. Perhaps after Omega Supreme was woken up nobody had a problem calling the ship "Omega Supreme" even retroactively. But while they were actually flying around in his deactivated body, it might have been a little creepy/disrespectful to call it "Omega Supreme".

I think the articles should technically be merged, since the ship was Omega Supreme in stasis the whole time. However, both articles are perfectly good the way they are and I think it seems easier to convey information with the two articles. - Starfield 11:14, 10 November 2009 (EST)

The ship was never intended to be named "Teletran-1" in the cartoon, but one of the adaptation comics called it that for lack of a better name (and so as not to give away the surprise.) In the cartoon, the ship would be called Omega or Omega Supreme, but it'd be taboo to call it that with him off-line. That essentially made the ship nameless, at least until he was repaired. In the cartoon (and also the Almanac) it's made explicitly clear that Teletran-1 is the AI system on the ship. I'd say that the ship's name was only Teletran-1 in one of the adaptation comics micro-continuities. If there are going to be two articles, Teletran-1 is the best place for the ship article, since he just doesn't have a separate name in the main continuity. However, it should be made explicitly clear that that's just his AI in the cartoon/comics/almanac shared continuity. Otherwise we're presenting mis-information. We also might want to create an article just for his AI. We have them for less. That'd be a hassle of an disambiguation though. --Jimsorenson 12:41, 10 November 2009 (EST)

As I recall, wasn't it "The Arrival," written by Isenberg himself and released after the surprise had already come in the cartoon, that called the ship "Teletran-1"? - Chris McFeely 12:47, 10 November 2009 (EST)

Nope. Transformers Animated Volume 1, by Zachary Rau.--Jimsorenson 12:52, 10 November 2009 (EST)

I do not think a ship can be truly nameless. If the ship, piloted by Autobots, came into a spaceport and had to broadcast its registry, I imagine they would identify it with a name that was not "Omega Supreme". - Starfield 13:03, 10 November 2009 (EST)

Be that as it may, none was identified in the show. There IS a canon name for the ship, "Teletran-1", but this was SPECIFICALLY declared to NOT be the name of the ship in most of the fiction. So, where does that leave us?--Jimsorenson 13:10, 10 November 2009 (EST)

I think all ships need a name for identification as a practical matter. They didn't use "Omega Supreme" at the time (to keep the ship's identity a secret and/or out of respect for Omega). Using the name of the AI for convenience makes some sense. I don't have any opinions stronger than that on the matter. - Starfield 13:34, 10 November 2009 (EST)

Teletran

You know, it occurs to me, now that this silly naming problem is a thing of the past, Teletran-1 could probably stand to have her own article. - Chris McFeely 05:23, 13 December 2010 (EST)