Talk:Transformers: Dark of the Moon (novel)

This is just a question, but why is Kelly here? I Mean she was in Robots in Disguise, not Dark of the Moon. Just sayin'- Dinodigger97 20,May,2011 11:48 A.M.

A synopsis already? Why?

You know, just yesterday Chris McFeely reinstated the comingsoon tag after an anon removed, I believe so that we would hold our horses and keep spoilers for DOTM off the wiki, even if the novels and comics are available for purchase. However, Eacg7 took it upon himself to fill this out, and because it's Eagc7, there's bound to be typos and grammatical errors. Because this article is now full of spoilers, none of the wiki's regular contributors or staff will come anywhere near it. So congratulations. --FFN 02:59, 27 May 2011 (EDT)

I know for a fact that whoever made the synopsis just copied this from comicbookmovies.com.--121.96.204.153 03:05, 27 May 2011 (EDT)

I just checked (because I don't care about spoilers), and yeah, definitely not Eacg7's work and definitely taken from comicbookmovies.com (with some minor adjustments). I removed the synopsis and put the coming soon template back up. Geewunling 03:09, 27 May 2011 (EDT)

So the Synopsis that was written, is it the true story from the novel. DOTM123 16:28, 27 May 2011

Why are you assuming all of us care about spoilers, FFN? —Interrobang 11:37, 27 May 2011 (EDT)

It was just a simple question, asking if the story was true, which obviously it is due to you all been so disappointed you know the ending. DOTM123 27 May 2011

I was not talking to you, dude. Unless your name is FFN. —Interrobang 11:41, 27 May 2011 (EDT)

oops sorry mate, didn't relise. DOTM123 27 May 2011

Because we do tend to care about spoilers and inadvertently spoiling the movies for ourselves and our readership. Keep it off the wiki for another month, I say. --FFN 00:24, 31 May 2011 (EDT)

Oh good, Interrobang's here to tell us all what we want. Thanks, Interrobang. (We kept the novel synopsis off the wiki for the other two movies, too.) --ItsWalky 00:33, 31 May 2011 (EDT)

And if you want a justification, I think this talk page serves as a good example. Who, exactly, among us is willing to be the guy who checks, for example, Eagc7's spoiler edits on pages to make sure they're readable and correct? And who's going to check THAT guy's edits to make sure his fix of Eagc7's material is correct? If most of our editors would rather avoid spoilers, then we shouldn't leave pages to those who are less dependable/consistent editors. Then we just have pages and pages and pages of crap that's going to remain rotting out in the open for the weeks duration until we can fix them. The wiki is collaborative. And when people don't want to collaborate because of sensitive material, that material should be put off limits until it can be collaborative. --ItsWalky 01:13, 31 May 2011 (EDT)

You are reading too much into "not all of us care about spoilers" in relation to this one article. I have nothing in particular against deleting any untrustworthy edits that people don't feel like editing for various reasons or keeping information out of character pages. —Interrobang 01:34, 31 May 2011 (EDT)

We should just add the info. If people don't want to be spoiled, why would they want to read the summary of the novel? Anyone who doesn't want to be spoiled wouldn't even bother reading the page.--Primo 16:50, 19 June 2011 (EDT)

Which means that if the page is horribly formatted, full of typos or perhaps even outright lies, only few contributors will be willing to bring or capable of bringing the page up to standards. Geewunling 16:58, 19 June 2011 (EDT)

This article should probably unlocked now

Yeah. --FFN 13:38, 9 July 2011 (EDT)