Talk:Silverstreak

I'm really questioning why this was split out in the first place? Saix (talk) 12:05, 2 August 2023 (EDT)

Agreed. Both the designer commentary and the Pulse listing cited make it pretty clear that this is G1 Bluestreak. --Thylacine 2000 (talk) 12:42, 2 August 2023 (EDT)

Uh, that is not how I read Mark Maher's commentary on Instagram. S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47 (talk) 15:18, 2 August 2023 (EDT)

Another vote against splitting this out. Considering Mark Maher's commentary mentions CAD renders and such, it's not like he was speaking "in universe", just specifically about the toy itself.MCRG (talk) 15:48, 2 August 2023 (EDT)

That’s how I read it. And it’s annoying that this toy is buried here instead of being at the logical spot based on nothing more than ambiguous designer notes. There’s more supporting IDW “Silverstreak” being a different guy than this. Saix (talk) 17:01, 2 August 2023 (EDT)

While the Silverstreak debate continues, I have restored an entry on Bluestreak's toy page for informational purposes. S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47 (talk) 17:45, 2 August 2023 (EDT)

Mark talking about "characters" absolutely makes it sound like he thinks of Silverstreak as a different character rather than a new count of paint on Bluestreak, but at the same time I agree this toy should be on Bluestreak's page as well. --Riptide (talk) 18:24, 2 August 2023 (EDT)

Whereas the official product copy thinks he's Bluestreak, if we're taking the references to the cartoon literally. Saix (talk) 18:52, 2 August 2023 (EDT)

So are we weighing (disputed) implied designer intent over formal corporate sources? MCRG (talk) 12:07, 3 August 2023 (EDT)

Well, I mean, the official copy claims he's "inspired by the animated series", which he bluntly isn't; he's inspired by the Diaclone toy, and never appeared in anything like this deco in the cartoon. --Riptide (talk) 13:37, 3 August 2023 (EDT)

With this talk of "officialness" I do think it is worth keeping in mind that these Hasbro designer Instagram accounts are pretty transparently a polished marketing-managed PR initiative as opposed to, say, Hasbro employees firing off on their personal Twitter accounts after hours or something. The accounts aren't used for anything else. --AzimuthAcolyte (talk) 14:10, 3 August 2023 (EDT)

I provided citations for all the sources I was working with beyond the ready availability of the "Bluestreak" trademark when I made the page, so do what you will with the evidence from there I suppose. --AzimuthAcolyte (talk) 15:35, 2 August 2023 (EDT)

Another vote against this page. --M Sipher (talk) 06:11, 3 August 2023 (EDT)

Medix is *also* described as "inspired by The Transformers animated series", so I'm willing to wager it's copypasta based on "G1 Universe" being what the website would use. It's funny to report it as if it were true, but it should not be the deciding factor. After all, Shadowstrip is excellent precedent for a guy whose toy is simply on two pages from the getgo. Sky Shadow (talk) 14:04, 3 August 2023 (EDT)

Yeah, I was gonna say — with Shadowstrip, we have precedent for "this design team considers "new name for unusual deco of existing character" to mean a new character", which fits with Mark's designer notes. (This is also why I think "Laser Cycle" should be on a new page as well as on Jazz's page, but I can at least see that there's other mitigating factors there.) --Riptide (talk) 14:10, 3 August 2023 (EDT)

Shadowstrip and Laser Cycle do not have the precedent of being an established, frequently used alternate name and look of an existing character with no full bio to contradict him not just being that guy again like this one. This feels very much like reading too much into that design commentary and the designers speaking on different terms than the wiki. MCRG (talk) 20:46, 3 August 2023 (EDT)

That. Shadowstrip at least got some measure of a personality and the designer spelling out that it could be G2 Drag Strip or another guy. (And we're not giving Laser Cycle a page till it's actually been established to be a new character.) This guy is a nobody where the only content of his page outside the toy writeup and deco origin is jokes. (You could make up a Frankenstein page with this toy and IDW Silverstreak, I guess, but I doubt anybody here cares enough to do that.) Saix (talk) 22:35, 3 August 2023 (EDT)

Went ahead and added a deletion tag to this page. If Laser Cycle, a previously unreleased deco with a technically new name and an equal amount of character info, is (sensibly) being treated as just a new form of Jazz, there's absolutely no reason this guy should stand alone. --MCRG (talk) 11:27, 15 August 2023 (EDT)

Now hold on, I acknowledge deletion of this page is a pretty foregone conclusion at this point but leveraging the fiddly and somewhat-up-in-the-air case of Laser Cycle as precedent going forward strikes me as going a bit far. --AzimuthAcolyte (talk) 15:13, 15 August 2023 (EDT)

Got to be honest here: the burden of proof that we apparently require to split out a new character page is insane. If I understand correctly, the entire argument against having this page rests on "Well, maybe Mark didn't mean "character" when he said character". Which, sure, is entirely possible - corporate language isn't always the same as Normal People language - but surely the most straightforward explanation is that Mark meant what he said, no? If there's reasonable doubt, why is the default to squirrel this away in the depths of Bluestreak's toy page? If we're to take a previous toy as precedent, I feel like Shadowstrip is a closer point of comparison than Laser Cycle, because Silverstreak didn't come out in the same wave as a Bluestreak toy. Is there an actual reason that mirroring the toy writeup on both pages is unacceptable? --Riptide (talk) 17:20, 15 August 2023 (EDT)

I agree, I think this is a Shadowstrip situation where we can comfortably keep the toy on both pages with a note explaining the situation. Grum (talk) 17:23, 15 August 2023 (EDT)

Seems reasonable to me. Apologies if I was a bit overzealous in not leaving it in both places to start with. --AzimuthAcolyte (talk) 17:30, 15 August 2023 (EDT)

I also vote for keeping it. - DannyBoy (talk) 19:55, 15 August 2023 (EDT)

I didn't have time to reply when this topic was first broached, but yeah, I find it wild that people are against this page—speaking as someone who is generally for page merges! Everything Mark said indicated to me that this was intended as a new character. Yeah, it uses a color scheme Bluestreak has used in the past, and it uses a name originally invented for Bluestreak... but those two things taken together, this guy isn't called Bluestreak and doesn't look like Bluestreak. It's obvious that Mark thought it would be funny to have the blue one be "Silverstreak" and the silver one be "Bluestreak", and it is funny, and surely it can't be that the TFWiki of all websites would be so unfunny as to act like this isn't the explicitly-stated idea behind the release. If the toy's on both pages, what's the problem with having this fun extra one? —The Wadapan (talk) 17:43, 15 August 2023 (EDT)

How is it "squirreling away" anything? The only thing you can say about this toy that isn't a joke is that "Mark ambiguously said it's a 'character'". People who don't pore over every single Instagram comment will take this as what it appears as: a toy of Bluestreak. And look it up accordingly. Saix (talk) 19:32, 15 August 2023 (EDT)

People who don't pore over every single Instagram comment will probably look up "Silverstreak" since that's what's written on the package. --ItsWalky (talk) 19:49, 15 August 2023 (EDT)

And they'll end up on Bluestreak because that's what Silverstreak points to. Saix (talk) 19:56, 15 August 2023 (EDT)

I have to agree with Saix, i mean Silverstreask is LITERALLY apart of Bluestreak bio.--Pizza-king1 (talk) 21:47, 15 August 2023 (EDT)

We can update that redirect to go to the Silverstreak page. McBaggins (talk) 21:48, 15 August 2023 (EDT)

If we're going that route, then the page should just be at "Silverstreak" to begin with? Saix (talk) 15:44, 16 August 2023 (EDT)

I'd agree with that, yes. --Riptide (talk) 17:21, 16 August 2023 (EDT)

Agreed with keeping this page, the designer himself said it's a new character, and also what Wads said about funy page being harmless. McBaggins (talk) 21:48, 15 August 2023 (EDT)

Considering the designer himself also says, "I have vowed to try and make every character release different then the last," implying he thinks this is a new release of a character that's already had a release, I find the "designer himself [definitively] said it's a new character" argument to still be weak. My next question becomes, if this page remains, in the future when more Silverstreak toys with no discernable bios get released, are they going to go here or Bluestreak's page or both?--MCRG (talk) 13:23, 16 August 2023 (EDT)

I would assume that if they're called "Silverstreak" and use the blue deco with no clarification, they'd go on both. --Riptide (talk) 17:21, 16 August 2023 (EDT)

Conceptual history section

For the record: I've added a "conceptual history" to this page with the intent of making it an explanation of the complicated history of "Blue Bluestreak almost being his own guy but tripping at every hurdle". Hopefully this addresses the complaint of "there's not enough on the page to warrant it existing"; if anyone has input on stuff that should be removed or added I'd appreciate it. That said, with votes currently at 9:5 in favour of keeping this page, are people alright with taking off the delete template? --Riptide (talk) 19:38, 25 August 2023 (EDT)

Late response, but this conceptual history section is the perfect expansion to complete the page. S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47 (talk) 03:26, 6 October 2023 (EDT)

Masterpiece bio Diaclone story thingy

Would it be appropriate to list the MP-18B Bluestreak figure on here, along with the elements of its (and Spin-Out's) bio added into a fiction section? Considering that it was supposed to represent the original Bluestreak under the influence of his "Diaclone counterpart". Or do we not consider Silverstreak as the Diaclone version due to being listed as G1 Universe instead of Diaclone Universe, like the Burn Out figure? --Dinobot Scorn (talk) 17:16, 10 August 2025 (EDT)

Coming back to this....

With Chris's recent video for the Basics on Bluestreak (particularly the fact that he doesn't really mention this at all), I've come back to look through Mark's comments and I gotta say...I'm not really convinced that what he's saying is that Silverstreak is a separate character. It feels very marketing speak in its vague way, and I dunno that we really can justify having him be seperate off of that alone, especially given that "Silverstreak" has no bio or tech specs to even outright separate him from the average Bluestreak. I think also with regards to the IDW character, Chee's art on the Bumblebee mini-series does seem like he was just kind of adding whoever; I don't know how detailed Zander Cannon's scripts were on that front, but Roadbuster appears in issue #2 without ever showing up in the Costa ongoing otherwise, and later fiction indicating he was elsewhere. I think it's probably worth coming back to re-examining what's happening with this. Escargon (talk) 09:26, 24 January 2026 (EST)

Why would the toy be called "Silverstreak" if it was intended to be Bluestreak? We have the precedent of things like Red Cog and Diaclone Universe Twin Twist to indicate that the Generations team is happy to use "character name with a modifier" if they think of the toy as the same guy. And ultimately, what harm does having this page cause? --Broadside (talk) 12:21, 24 January 2026 (EST)

Cog and Twin Twist are fair examples, and I don't think this page causes any harm by being up. I do think that as long as the page stays up, Mark's comments are vague enough though that we could stand to rewrite the last paragraph in the conceptual history section to make the ambiguity more clear. Escargon (talk) 12:42, 24 January 2026 (EST)