Talk:Omniverse

Needs More Transformers

Wow, roughly .5% of this page is actually about Transformers. You outdo yourself, Derik. --ItsWalky 01:43, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

... --FortMax 01:43, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

The Omniverse is a fundamentally not "About Transformers."

Yet we have the Omniversal matrix, which is Transformers-- so what is the Omniverses? We have the TF Multiverse... but we also have worlds not part of the TF Multiverse.

An article about the Omniverse as a structure containing multiple Multiverses is needed. Whether or not this is that article is a question. And frankly, part of the reason this has so much "non-Transformers" material is because this article also has to define what the hell a Multiverse is, since our Multiverse article is an out-fiction description of how TFWiki organize continuity familties that talks about the in-fiction concept of a TF multiverse as an afterthought. -Derik 01:50, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

....what? --Detour 02:16, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

This article does not confine itself to material published in Transformers fiction. In other words, you've managed to create an article that makes the argument for its own deletion right from the start! --KilMichaelMcC 02:19, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

Fuck you too buddy. -Derik 02:32, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

There's no need to be insulting. Look, this article is simply outside of this wiki's purview, and blatantly so. If you wanted to "define what the hell a Multiverse is" you should have created the article at Multiverse, which is currently a redirect, and focused solely on Transformers. The possible intersection of the TF multiverse with Marvel's and such would be at most a trivia note. Explaining things like what the common anchor of the Wildstorm universes is.... has nothing to do with Transformers. --KilMichaelMcC 02:57, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

I don't want to define what the TF Multiverse is. I want to define what a multiverse is and how it functions, what the structure multiverses rest in and how they interact, the rules by which crossovers like TF/Avengers function (because they do have fixed rules and an explanation for why the hell two worlds seem to temporarily overlap that were established on the Marvel side-- and that is relevant to TF, since those rules are being used in TF) and use the framework of solid ground created by pinning down those things to figure out the Marvel comics timelines, timestorm and Earthforce-- and how time, dimensions, and time-travel and possible futures function in the TF Multiverse.

But you can't really do any of that without a solid framework. Everything devolves into vague unknowability: "This is how Cybertron functions as a multiversal axis." "You don't know that, it seems vague to m!." "It's how Multiversal Axes function. Here's a dozen examples of other multiversal axes that work the same way, and the circumstantial edvidence in TF showign that it works the same way here." "Those aren't from Transformers. You need examples from Transformers." "You cannot find an example of other multiversal axes within TF fiction, because all of TF fiuction takes places within a single multiverse." Omniverse is supposed to be a starting point to set some ground rules or common understanding for those other articles to be built on. Just like pinning down exactly what any other sort of terminology means enables you to figure out more about the universe, the structure of the multiverse and Omniverse is something that needs to be covered by this Wiki if there's to ever be any hope of figuring out the TF Multiverse.

Also, I accept your apology for being so insulting. -Derik 03:18, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

You know, I really wish you were still posting on ATT, or some other TF forum, because I think that might be a much better place for you to theorize about this stuff. --KilMichaelMcC 03:40, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

Theorization doesn't generally include footnotes and citations like this article.

Or were you just being snide by implying that I planned to jizz fanwank over any future articles that might come out of this? That the TF stuff wouldn't be footnoted out the ass? That's the entire point Ethan, to lay a foundation and start picking apart and comparing what the TF canon actually says. The point is to replace fanon and vague conjuncture and fuzzy understanding with fact. -Derik 03:55, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

I wasn't being snide! I miss your ATT posts! They were often fascinating stuff, and they don't end up with you getting pissed off when stuff you write has to be deleted because the rest of us aren't capable of seeing the world in Derik-vision. I think the fundamental problem here is that when i comes to "how the TF multiverse works" vague conjucture and fuzzy understandings are all we're ever likely to have on this subject, because most of the folks responsible for creating the canon didn't/don't actually give a crap about creating anything consistent and logical to explain this stuff, i.e., the facts that you're looking for. --KilMichaelMcC 04:27, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

At which point is becomes useful to have comparative examples outside the TF Multiverse. The One seems to have inserted Unicron and Primus into the Universe back when it was a single universe, (or at least a lockstep one) not a multiverse. The DC Multiverse was a single universe that shattered. Likewise, IIRC the entire Marvel Multiverse as we know it today resulted from the previous universe dying when its Multiversal axis was destroyed. Axis failure exists in the TF Multiverse... but we've never seen it. Localized Multiversal collapses exist in the TF Multiverse... but we've only ever gotten the most cockeyed view of what the mechanics involved are.

And frankly, I think that the way time works in TF does make sense, it's just complicated. (I mean... there's some implication that the TF Multiverse is executing asynchronously, like a domino cascade, instead of in true parallel. That's one of the most complicated fictional multiverse mechanisms I've ever heard of if it's true... but it also makes a certain amount of sense, because it recognizes the state-machine evolution of Transformers fiction, while absorbing a lot of the problems that causes.)

Look, to write "Junkyard's article," I looked over every appearance this guy had-- ever-- in detail, and a pattern emerged-- he seems to take point if Junkion trading operations. If nothing else, the TF Multiverse and time travel will make sense on that level, being able to say "well, looking at a bunch of vague examples, this appears to be the mechanism."

But I'm mroe optimistic than that. Furman's not shy about rattling off explanations. And the guidebooks do their part. I genuinely think that the TF canon itself explains how the Multiverse and time work... if you take the time to compile all the references together and figure out how they fit together. There does seem to be an underlying pattern, so the task is to track down the explicit references that turn that from a vague pattern into a crisp one with clear outlines. -Derik 04:48, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

Hrm. I was being rather rude to Kil, and not my normal confrontational/constructive rude, just mean. I apologize.

I guess what I'm frustrated about is... the deletion request doesn't seem to be because of concern the article is inaccurate-- merely that it's outside of TF's pervue. But the Omniverse has been mentioned in TF-- and more than that it's active in TF, at crossover points, and there's some stuff abotut he nature, structure and extent of the TF Multiverse that should be covered by TFWiki-- but aren't anywhere, to which the answer seems to be "then split this and start a Multiverse article." If the content needs to be on the wiki and isn't-- Deletion seems just wrong. If I was just haring off after a wild goose I wouldn't care-- but there's tuff here that in some form needs to be part of this site.

The details of this article do deal most entirely with non-TF properties... but that's because this article is about how the fictional construct of the TF Multiverse interacts and relates to the fictional constructs of those other properties-- and I think that it's important to have these examples (including universes that haven't directly interacted with TF) in order to give a proper sense of the general structure that the TF Multiverse fits in. I'm not imposing those on the Tf Multiverse-- you'd be hard pressed to make the more explicitly Universe than an article whose entire mandate is "beyond the TF Multiverse lies...?" tha parallax is useful precievely because TF conforms to the general model-- so these other examples simply reinforce in a meaningful way what's already there in TF, but hard to distinguish.

Anyway, I'm going to sleep. I'd ask (Kil particularly) to think about how they think this information should be structured. The article I created was meant to be a starting point of a big project to describe the very widest view of the Transformers multiverse-- a forrest whose shape is often difficult to make out amid a sea of details. -Derik 05:58, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

You can save this article, but it will require a blowtorch. I recommend a general anesthetic first:

• Delete the "list of multiverses". Only TFs have any business being there.
• Delete "functional infinity" section.
• Condense the "multiverse" section into the introductory paragraph. If you absolutely must include DC adn Marvel and Vincent Price, mention them here as "some typical multiverses are A, B and C, period." xref: Shattered Glass, where there used to be this big long pointless paragraph of wankery about... I don't know, Marvel Ultimate or some shit, and now there's just "kinda like Star Trek or that other one." -- Repowers 02:47, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

But I have no interest in reducing it to a 1-paragraph article, and that reduces its usefulness as a link-to-point when discussing cross-multiversal crossovers.

We have an article called "Multiverse" that's an out-fiction description of how TFWiki treats Continuity families.

If the Death's Head article wants to explain that DH then crossed outside of the scope of the Transformers multiverse... where is it supposed to link to?

The TF Multiverse itself contains properties like G.I. Joe, Battle Beasts, M.A.S.K., etc. Our "Multiverse" page doesn't tell you this, because it's dedicated not to the TF Multiverse (the set of universes for which Cybertron is apparently the Stable Axis) but to "the Transformers canon covered by this wiki." And the TF canon is much smaller than the body of works included in the TF multiverse.

I'm just saying... some of those bits you're suggesting blowtorching off are important. And if they don't belong here, where should they go? -Derik 03:00, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

As noted above, we don't have an article called "Multiverse." That's a redirect. --KilMichaelMcC 03:36, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

I vote keep w/ rewrite. Needs a little history of the term omniverse (invented by Mark Gruenwald, etc.) and a better explanation of just how exactly it connects to Transformers. Thanos6 04:46, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

I vote this should be at "Multiverse", written solely about how multiverses work within TF fiction, then have a trivia section with brief notes/links about other fiction's multiverses and how they fit with the TF multiverse into an "omniverse". Every single other article on this wiki about something that's mainly non-TF is still written solely from Transformers knowledge, even when we know more about the character/concept from non-TF media.

I basically agree with the thought that this is interesting, and would make a good forum post somewhere, but any article here needs to be solely about the Transformers part of things.

Or at the very least, we could have multiverse and omniverse articles. The multiverse one talks about how multiverses work in TF fiction, and the omniverse talks about how TF has had crossovers with things like Star Wars and Marvel, thus implying that the TF multiverse may be part of a larger omniverse of multiverses that sometimes intersect. Or however that would work. Point being, it still needs to be written based from a TF media POV. --Jeysie 10:45, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

The TF Multiverse itself contains properties like G.I. Joe, Battle Beasts, M.A.S.K., etc. ...some of those bits you're suggesting blowtorching off are important. And if they don't belong here, where should they go?

Uh. See, the article as it stands says absolutely nothing to this effect. It's just a random list of random fictional multiverses, brought up for no discernible reason at all -- which means it's nothing more than an open invitation for anybody to turn it into some gigantic Wikipediesque list of "every fictional universe I can think of". To be there, they must have explicitly stated ties to Transformers. Period. Robert Heilein didn't have any input into Transformers -- what's he doing here? Stephen King wrote Transformers? Really? Do clarify!

If I understand all this, the basic point of the page is supposed to be that "the TF multiverse is demonstrably part of the larger omniverse, itself encompassing all fiction ever"... which is such a sweeping statement that it really tells us nothing at all. "All things that exist, are extant!" TF ties into DC? Show us how! -- Repowers 11:14, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

-- Repowers 11:14, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

Transformers crossed over with Marvel which crossed over with DC :p

Fly in the ointment

Gobotron.--Rosicrucian^Talk 03:31, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

What about it? Bug Bite includes his own universe among the 15 quadrillion of the TF Multiverse, so presumably the universe Gobotron is from is part of it. Either Gobotron is Cybertron (unlikely) or Cybertron is simply obscure and distant, or long dead-- but still acting as an axis-- in his universe.

The GoBots universe doesn't seem to be 'special,' there are more than one of them... (SG BugBite, remember? He's not a singularity...) so it's jsut a very different-looking type of TF Universe, like the Squadron Supreme Earth is a Marvel Universe under the hood (it have Skrulls, the Darkforce, the same high-level cosmic entities, etc.) despite looking quite different on the surface. -Derik 03:51, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

Finite Omniverse

How the hell does one calculate the number of Universes in the Omniverse?

Heinlen calculated the total volume of the Omniverse by multiplying its height, width and breadth. (Only it's sorta teseracty, because each dimension loops around back to its starting place, so it's more like degrees on a protractor.) -Derik 05:29, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

Isn't the point that it goes on forever and ever? If the Omniverse is finite, it kind throws a loop in all those "dude, if you think about it, there's probobly a Universe were Star Wars is real" theories that nerds come up with when their high. 24.192.196.242 06:25, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

Careful, Derik. You keep bringing up non-Transformers stuff here and you'll end up attracting Omnios! --Detour 05:48, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

The Omniverse contains everything that has ever been thought of. You don't need an "infinite" number of rubic cubes to represent every possible permutation-- you only need 43 quintillion rubics cubes. In a fixed space (the universes) and a fixed span of time (the big bang through the big chill) there are not an infinite number of things that can be thought of-- the number of things is large-but-finite.

Can you think of an infinite number of things in a minute? If the answer is "no," then if you multiply the maximum number of things you can think of by the number of minutes in the Universe's life span, you have a very large finite number.

(It's also a functionally infinite number-- there's only ~350 quadrillion seconds in the entire lifespan of the universe. The number Heinlin proposes is trillions of times that size.) -Derik 11:15, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

Is this the same Omniverse that theoretically contains Universes with very different Laws than our own?

Taken to Trivia

I grabbed the few points out of this that actually seemed strongly relevent to TFs and brought them over to the Trivia section of the Multiverse article. How's that? --71.235.138.121 07:02, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

As it stands

I actually don't mind this that much, it's one article in the back-ass corner of the wiki where nobody's going to see it and it does make one or two salient points. With a little work, I think it's relatively relevant, especially as discussing how the Transformers universes have sometimes intersected with other known multiverses (Marvel being the most obvious). I dunno. Hooper_X 08:08, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

I actually do think we could use an article like that, but I'd suggest calling it "Crossover" and making it explicitly out-of-universe. Start it with a real-world definition of "crossover" and then list all the other properties that TF has intersected with (and briefly explain those crossovers, of course).

The funny thing is, I'd probably be more comfortable with this article serving that duty if the term "Omniversal" never HAD appeared in TF. But because it has, and in a tantalizingly vague way, I feel like we explicitly shouldn't play up its real-world meaning. Luckily, we also have the word "crossover", which I'm pretty sure has been used in official TF publications to mean exactly what we mean it to mean.

- Jackpot 03:08, 29 June 2010 (EDT)

Is there a Transformers Omniverse?

Interesting, but I am not sure I buy it. Is there an Omniverse in Transformers? Are you basing this whole thing on the Omniversal Matrix, which wasn't explained? I would think that if there is an omniverse in Transformers, it is equivalent to the Transformers Multiverse, since nothing outside of canon can be said to exist in any way whatsoever. - Starfield 10:23, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

Y'know, Star... while I'm not advocating everything Derik has done with this article ...there is such a thing as taking the whole "willful ignorance" joke (and that's what it is - we basically act this way because it was funny to do it with Spider-Man and Godzilla and it's since grown into a rule) too far. - Chris McFeely 10:58, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

Not really... for instance, Memory Alpha pretty much plays the "willful ignorance" card completely straight in all parts of their articles except for their equivalent of the Trivia sections.

I think it's actually a good idea outside of the humor, as it means someone who's reading the article can know the info on it is solely from TF media, and thus "correct". Whereas all information from outside TF sources may or may not be actually "true" in TF sources, and thus can't really be used as "main section" info. --Jeysie 11:04, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

Seconded for Chris, I've never been a fan of the willful ignorance. But to Starfield's point, there pretty much has to be a Transformers Omniverse, by nature of the crossovers. Clearly the mechanics of the Star Wars universe or the Marvel Universe or even the Disney Universe don't quite match up with the whole Cybertron-as-axis idea. Therefor, all the billions of Transformers universes (the Transformers Multiverse, which SHOULD have its own article) are just part of a subset of some greater thing. Since the Omniverse is a term that exists and has meaning, AND has been mentioned in passing in Transformers, that seems like the logical place for this kind of idea.

Basically, I vote to let the article stay but monitor it to make sure it doesn't get out of hand or lead to people trying to make unrelated articles. --Jimsorenson 11:11, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

Well, my thing is... for instance, taking Spider-Man as an example. We know that outside of TF media, Uncle Ben dies in a robbery and that's what gives Spider-Man a lot of his motivation. However, the best you can say in the main part of a TF wiki article is that, that fact doesn't contradict with anything we've seen in TF media, not that we know that's true for Spider-Man in TF stories.

And if we later get a TF story that says Uncle Ben didn't die or some such, that wouldn't necessarily be a "mistake", because it doesn't contradict any TF media, and TF stories don't have to "care" about non-TF media.

Hence why "willful ignorance" actually serves a purpose other than humor. It means not assuming that something that's true outside of TF media is also true within TF media. --Jeysie 11:24, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

I get that, I do, but I still think we go to far with it. Let's look at Spider-Man, specifically. On page 11 of issue #3, the editor notes that this issue takes place before Spider-Man #258. That explicitly sets at the very least Spider-Man #258 in continuity with the Marvel run of Transformers. Then, that issue would bring in Mary Jane, the Black Cat, Hobgoblin, Mister Fantastic, the Human Torch, Aunt May, Joe Robertson ... and any other issues were footnoted in #258. I haven't actually done that, but I'd be surprised if it they didn't reference two or three issues of Spider-Man and probably whatever issue of Fantastic Four was going on at the time. That pulls in even MORE of the Spider-Man backstory and mythos. Rinse and repeat.

Am I being pedantic? Yes. Do I think we should do this sort of boot-strapping? Absolutely not. But it's very clear that, in this case, one can easily make a very simple and coherent argument that the Spider-Man we saw was in fact the same dude from the classic Marvel comics, complete with Uncle Ben. So, for us to pretend that we know nothing about Spider-Man is silly. It also prevents us from making connections that we might otherwise be able to make. God Ginrai's name was designed so that ommitting every other Japanese character gave us 'Go Ji Ra', better known in the west as Godzilla. That's pretty interesting, and in fact Godzilla was referenced elsewhere in Transformers ... but you'd have a hard time finding that out in our current system. --Jimsorenson 11:54, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

Well, we don't have to entirely pretend we don't know about outside appearances of a character; that's what the "Trivia" sections are for, after all. Stuff like info about God Ginrai's name might make a great Trivia note, for instance. Outside info just doesn't belong in the main in-universe section of an article until it actually gets used in a TF story somewhere.

And it definitely should not comprise almost the entirety of an article as it does here. Because, even if you discount "willful ignorance", why should I care how other properties use the Multiverse/Omniverse concepts? I'm reading a Transformers wiki; I want to know how Transformers handles those concepts. --Jeysie 12:08, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

So far as Spidey goes, his article is actually well overdue for an update, since the whole "willful ignorance" thing went completely out the window with the New Avengers/TF crossover. - Chris McFeely 12:01, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

Definitely agree. It's getting as dumb as the time we tried to pretend that Reed Richards and Mr. Fantastic were different people.--Rosicrucian^Talk 13:21, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

My beef

This page's biggest crimes are the scant few things that pretend to be Transformers-related. "Primus wishes to join the omniverse, beyond Transformers universes"? That's entirely made up. That's fanon. Yes, he wants to join the "Omniversal Matrix." But there is absolutely no evidence that the "Omniversal Matrix" has anything to do with an actual Omniverse-as-portrayed-by-this-article, versus just something that Furman thought was Cosmic-sounding-ish. But the problem is that this article REQUIRES fanon such as this in order to remain the .5% relevant that it currently resides at. The article is built on a foundation of fanon, and for that it shall not stand. --ItsWalky 11:10, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

Primus was a probe sent into our Universe by The One, a being beyond the Transformers Multiverse^{[citation needed]}. Like Transformers return to the Allspark, when Unicron is defeated, it's his duty to eventually report back what he found to The One.

The One is outside the TF Multiverse^{[citation needed]}, by definition. The place Primus dreams of returning to is beyond the TF Multiverse.^{[citation needed]}

Trying to pretend the Omniversal matrix (whatever it may be) is not beyond the TF Multiverse is foolishness. -Derik 11:19, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

And yet this little piece you've boiled your entire justification down to does not require the existence of an omniverse, particularly in the way you (and Marvel) have decided it exists. "Primus wants to rejoin the One in the Omniversal Matrix outside of the Transformers multiverse" is not the same thing as "Primus wants to go out to where the DC, Stephen King and Katamari Damacy fiction is". You're making that leap to justify this page on this wiki, and it is not within this wiki's purview. I have no doubt that there's a useful place you could be writing this stuff - that part of it which hasn't already been written, of course - but that place is not here. -LV 13:16, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

I notice you don't include Marvel in that list. Because Marvel demonstrably is out there.

So you're now positing the existance of "a completely seperate Omniverse, functionally identical to the generally recognized concept of an Omniverse, with nothing to distinguish it from that Omniverse... except that we're pretendign that these other things don't exist until they're mentioned." -Derik 13:27, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

Essentially, that's exactly right. Marvel has interacted with Transformers. Therefore Marvel is an appropriate topic for a Transformers wiki. An article that expands the scope of this wiki to every other fictional universe ever for no particularly functional reason (exactly who is the target audience of this article?) strikes me, at least, as completely dissimilar to acknowledging the existence and relevance to Transformers of, you know, things that have existed in and are relevant to Transformers. -LV 13:30, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

And yet, Marvel has intereacted with DC.

I could yammer on about how Star Wars has it's own multiverse-- that's TF-relevant... but the underlying nature of the Star Wars Multiverse is a cipher, nothing's been established, no instances of characters jumping continuities, etc.

There's confusion about Earth-120185-- is it part of the Marvel Multiverse or the Transformers Multiverse? Can a world be part of multiple multiverses, or is it jsut a member of one that closely apes the other?

The answer is yes, by the rules that seem to govern inter-multiversal crossovers including the ones Transformers has been involved in, a world can be a member of multiple multiverses. But the best concrete example of this is happens ot be DC's Earth 50, which is completely unambiguiously a member of two multiverses.

The Omniverse is a sort of sustem whose 'ground rules' are widely agreed on in fiction. And since TF has been both using those ground rules and explicitly referenced the Omniverse, I think it's fair game. Trying to pretend that there's a separate "Transformers Omniverse" somehow is ridiculous and creates a deliberately distorted reading of the stories involved. Bending TF fiction backwards to suit how you want it to be in your personal continuity is bad. Deal with what it is. -Derik 13:55, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

Yea, there is still a lot of Transformers fiction that I am unfamiliar with, but those claims struck me as unlikely. - Starfield 11:55, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

...

Having witnessed the birth of our Universe, an extradimensional entity known as The One grew curious and created twin exploratory heralds, Unicron and Primus. Transformers: The Ultimate Guide 1st ed p50 Unicron, "The Big Bang."

Being outside our universe sends probes into our universe. Fits rather nicely with primus wanting to one day join with the Omniversal matrix, doesn't it? "V'Jer reporting in."

Contrary to what you seem to believe, the fact you haven't read something doesn't mean I'm making it up. -Derik 13:23, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

That quote has nothing to do with the omniverse, or DC fiction or Stephen King fiction or Katamari Damacy fiction. You are extrapolating. --ItsWalky 13:32, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

And that would be a terrible thing... if I was saying that the DC Multiverse, Stephen King or Karamari Damacy had anything to do with The One. I'm not. I'm using two of them as parallel examples of the functioning of Multiverses-- a basic functioning that the Transformers Multiverse does adhere to. But then, you know that, since I'm explained this, repeatedly, further up.

If you want to edit the article to make it better fine, be my guest! Bit if you want to argue that this article should be deleted because the Omniverse doesn't exist in Transformers, you're simply wrong. -Derik 13:42, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

You have yet to demonsrate that Transformers canon involves an Omniverse at all without extrapolating from a) how other fictions handle it and b) what you want it to mean. Getting huffy and indignant is not a citation. -LV 14:02, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

Doesn't the fact Primus is a Multiversal entity injected into our Universe from something outside automatically dictate there is something outside? That he's a probe dictate that he return his findings? That he wants to join the "Omniversal Matrix" mean that there's a %^&*()Omniversse?

This argument seems to amount to "the word Omniverse has no inherent meaning, just because it's appeared in Transformers fiction we can't know that any concept contained within its meaning exists." The word "god" has never been defined in Transformers, but we have no problem saying Gods exist.

This is an argument for willful ignorance that i think is harming our ability to document Transformers. If you want to cut back on the stuff that hasn't toched TF fine. I disagree, but we're ultimately a consensus wiki. But if youw ant toa rgue that the Omniverse does not exist you're off your rocker. -Derik 14:09, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

The fact that there is something outside the Transformers multiverse does not mean there is the Omniverse you want to construct here outside the Transformers multiverse. This is not willful ignorance, it is not making things up. It is not equating the phrase "Omniversal Matrix" with the concept "a set of a bunch of other universes like they have in other fiction". The pretty bad article at Wikipedia notwithstanding, I don't' agree that Omniverse has any intrinsic meaning, and it certainly doesn't have the intrinsic meaning you assign to it here in the context of little bundled fictional universes. This is, as Rob Powers said way up at the top here, an exercise in "Oh man there must be a universe where Star Wars really happened", and contributes nothing to our understanding of Transformers. -LV 14:17, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

I'm done. If no one else wants to argue with you about this idiocy, I'm through wasting my time. Do as thou wilt. -LV 14:18, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

Don't worry, there's other people who want to argue with my idiocy.

Perhaps I was overly optimistic to assume the editing community would accept the existence of the Omnivrse as a given just because it's mentioned. It might be worthwhile to rewrite this article with cites for the existence of the Omniverse first, then move on from there. -Derik 14:21, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

Is an "Omniverse" mentioned, or just "the Omniversal Matrix"? --KilMichaelMcC 14:38, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

Just the "Omniversal Matrix." And it has as much to do with an actual omniverse as Emirate Xaaron's title means he's a political territory ruled by an Emir. --ItsWalky 14:55, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

For what it's worth, The Fallen is also credited as an "Omniversal Tyrant" in the Movie Universe book. - Chris McFeely 14:58, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

Aha. A second thing in Transformers that has "Omniversal" in it. We almost have an article! --ItsWalky 15:04, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

I think I would be surprised if there wasn't some tiny obscure mention of the omniverse somewhere in official TF fiction, to be honest... - Chris McFeely 15:06, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

When we find it, we can put it in the article. Until then, the article shouldn't be supposition. --ItsWalky 15:19, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

Your mom shouldn't be supposition. -Derik 17:34, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

If we're going to limit ourselves to only descriptions of the Omniverse within Transformers, descriptions which appear to be errors, then we might as well define Galaxy as whatever the hell the writers of Superlink and Gallaxy Force thought it was, instead of what it actually is.

Replace with a "Multiverse" article

Because that at least exists within Transformers. Maybe this might help. Item42 05:48, 19 June 2010 (EDT)

I don't think there's anything there that isn't already covered by continuity, which multiverse currently redirects to. --ItsWalky 09:21, 19 June 2010 (EDT)

Agreed, but I do think we could use a proper multiverse article that deals with the whole matter from a more in-universe perspective. Continuity is entirely meta from our wiki categorizational view, and universal stream deals with it from an in-universe organizational view, but we don't really have anything that explains how the multiverse and all the dimensional hopping really works in-universe.

To put it another way, Item's page as it stands isn't needed, but IMHO we could still use something. --Jeysie 09:31, 19 June 2010 (EDT)

I'd like to see what a proper Multiverse article would be like. Suggestions for improving my sandbox would be nice. Item42 10:12, 19 June 2010 (EDT)

It'd be a real project, I think. Ideally it would explain the multiverse from entirely an in-fiction POV... how they fit together logistically, how they merge, split, and die out in-universe, what ways there are to travel between them (and who's done it), what fiction deals with multiverses and dimensional travel, etc. --Jeysie 23:45, 28 June 2010 (EDT)

I completely support said project; in fact, I think we've needed it for a long time. And the deeper that the new fiction wades into those sorts of waters, the more we need it. - Jackpot 23:58, 28 June 2010 (EDT)

I didn't realize this talk page existed. Sorry. - Starfield 00:01, 29 June 2010 (EDT)