Talk:Wheelie (G1)

I applaud the profile. --ItsWalky 22:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

It's amazing how many sentences can rhyme without not making sense. American Girl 19:28, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, on second thought, I applaud the concept of the bio, but think the content is more appropriate for the animated continuity section. It seems to chronicle the circumstances of the movie, and not his personality. (Remember, in Dreamwave, he was never on Quintessa that we saw.) --ItsWalky 22:05, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Point conceded. The new bio's better than mine anyway. The whole entry is much improved. So many horrible rhymes...bwahahahahaha. --Autobus Prime 12:30, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

We totally need to complete this entry. This deserves to be a Featured Article. sadly, I'm pretty awful about fiction. I OWN most of it, but don't REMEMBER it very well. --M Sipher 06:20, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Having just rhymed all through the section I just added, I have no idea how Wheelie keeps it up 24/7. Exhausting! --Ratbat 09:06, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Rhyming isn't really all that hard if you have the vocabulary of a bard. --Andrusi 13:05, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Fixed the manga summary to rhyme and keep the gag going. Though I think I write rhymes more like Dr. Seuss than Wheelie...--DrSpengler 23:05, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

wow, this profile almost makes me wish I didn't use my Wheelie toy as cannon fodder in the late 80's -- great job with the rhymes whoever did this should work for a greeting card company

I'm fine with the rhyming in the article, but the rhythm really needs work. I'd change it, but I'm afraid of being accused of ripping apart large sections of the article for no good reason (see Walky's comment below).--G.B. Blackrock 22:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Not yet to be Featured

Sipher, the reason I unfeatured it is because the inconsistency of the rhyme's meter is really embarrassing. If you read the history, you'll see my note. --ItsWalky 14:57, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Then maybe you should have removed the "Featured Article" Category, which is why I put the tag on it (and is still there as of your last edit). --M Sipher 15:37, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Indeed I should! Meanwhile, history is your friend. --ItsWalky 15:43, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Commercial voice

Walky, Frank Welker never VOICED Scrappy-Doo! He did, however, voice Peewit. --Monzo 12:57, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Welker did voice Zzcooby & Freddy in new show! Wazzpinator 18:33, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Italian names

I don't have the brainpower to add these in rhyme tonight. If somebody could, Wheelie was called Saetta in the dub of TFTM, and... apparently Scooter in everything else. (At least, it doesn't SEEM to be a joke...) --Monzo 05:06, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I apologize. - Chris McFeely, not signed in

Continuity rhymes

"Continuity" doesn't rhyme with "see". [It rhymes with "bitty", to pick an irrelevant-but-accurate example] - 21:39, 16 August 2009 (EDT)

It also rhymes with "enginuity"! -- Ziyad 20:03, 18 August 2009 (EDT)

Or even "ingenuity"!--Apcog 00:27, 19 August 2009 (EDT)

Ooh! Here's one that's on-topic, "ambiguity"!! -- Ziyad 07:14, 19 August 2009 (EDT)

But seriously, folks...

...am I going to be hugely unpopular if I state my belief that the article has, at this point, gone way overboard? Rhymes in the section headers, line-breaks all over the place, rhymes being used to describe continuities where he didn't rhyme... I think that this page has long since crossed the line between "fun" and "taking it way too far". Frankly, I would almost be in favour of scaling it back to just having a rhyming opening and captions. A lot of the fiction section is, to my eyes, suffering because of the demands of the rhyme scheme. - Chris McFeely 10:11, 10 October 2009 (EDT)

All my hard work...unappreciated...:( --DrSpengler 10:47, 10 October 2009 (EDT)

But to be serious, I wrote nearly all the rhymes in the fiction portion of the article and created the linebreaks so folks could see the scheme. The rhymes in the fiction headers and continuity notes were some no-username's doing and I've never been very fond of them.

Still, if many people agree that the humor interferes with the facts, then we can put it to a vote as to whether we get rid of the rhymes in the headers, the rhymes all together or if we just leave it. It may be my joke, but I'm not going to have a heart attack if others want to change it so it doesn't interfere with the facts (unlike some members of this Wiki). --DrSpengler 10:54, 10 October 2009 (EDT)

Aw, it's not that it's not appreciated, I see what you were doing, but it's... it's like Bonecrusher hate jokes. We started out with them and they were funny when the article was small but then when it was filled in they got really tiresome but people kept dogpiling 'em on anyway, until we had to say "No more". That's sort of what I'm feeling here. The idea worked when the article was small, but when it's full (which it isn't yet!) I think it gets in the way more than it is fun. - Chris McFeely 10:56, 10 October 2009 (EDT)

I need to concur, although we should keep SOME rhymes for sure. At the very least, his summary. --Jimsorenson 11:20, 10 October 2009 (EDT)

I need to concur/although we should keep SOME rhymes for sure.

Why, there's one right there! :) - Chris McFeely 11:31, 10 October 2009 (EDT)

But this is the most awesome page on the wiki. It's one of the things people think of when they talk about how awesome our wiki is. It's like getting rid of the teacup ride at Disneyland. --ItsWalky 11:35, 10 October 2009 (EDT)

Or the testicles in ROTF. The Awesome defense only goes so far, especially in Transformers.--Jimsorenson 11:44, 10 October 2009 (EDT)

That's a terrible analogy. When people talk about our wiki, they mention our Wheelie article that is all rhymes, and this is a good thing that they think epitomizes what we stand for and why we're better than other wikis. When people talk about Devastator's balls, it's derisively. I don't understand your comparison. --ItsWalky 12:46, 10 October 2009 (EDT)

It's simple - Devastator's testicle's are 'awesome.' Bay thinks so. A lot of the moviegoing public though so. Most 'serious' fans thought otherwise. But an awful lot of people laughed and laughed at them, probably more than will ever read this wiki. Just because one group of people thinks something is awesome doesn't keep it from getting in the way of (imparting information / telling a strong story.) The fandom can be be a bit of an insulated community - an echo chamber, if you will. Pointing to anecdotal evidence one way or the other shouldn't be our benchmark. It's much more useful to go back to core principles.

But mostly I was seizing on your use of the word awesome which has been forever commingled with Bay for me.--Jimsorenson 13:25, 10 October 2009 (EDT)

Well, I think the charm of us writing articles in the personality of the characters extends to more than just this one. Crankcase, Perceptor, Rewind, etc., for instance. It can actually be weirdly useful sometimes in conveying information about characters without having to spell it out. But, if it's getting in the way of having an actual informative article in any instance, then it does need toning down. --Jeysie 13:35, 10 October 2009 (EDT)

I agree some of the rhyming should go. The headers, external link, notes and voice actor info in rhyme seems redundant to me, if not annoying. I can somewhat dig the argument not to put rhyme in sections of fiction in which he didn't rhyme, although I'd hate to see it go. But what I think would greatly help this article is a better layout. Currently, the article is all rather statically and confusingly "text-humongous white space-pic". I'd like to see it being connected a tad more by switching the text-pic order every second fiction/rhyme-paragraph (as well as having some of the paragraphs expanded). Geewunling 11:48, 10 October 2009 (EDT)

I think all of the paragraphs should remain in rhyme. Headers, bullet-point "list" items... no. That's overkill. --M Sipher 12:51, 10 October 2009 (EDT)

Yeah, mark me down as a compromise vote. Ditch the headers/notes, etc rhymes but keep the fiction section poetry. Partly because I spent a lot of time writing most of it, but also because I don't think the fiction poetry really interferes with the knowledge. The headers and stuff is annoying, though. --DrSpengler (at work, can't log in)

I'll agree with that. -- Dark T Zeratul 14:55, 12 October 2009 (EDT)

I'd quite happily dump the whole joke, which was never that funny. And it does seriously impede the article. Vote NO on this from me User:Eire 20.02 Oct 12 09 (UTC)

Japanese fiction: Rhyme or Not Rhyme?

Recently, I've been told to stop writing the Japanese fiction sections in rhyme because Wheelie didn't rhyme in Japan, and that all rhymes should be reverted to standard. I wrote the Japanes fiction sections in rhyme to keep up the theme and flow of the article, and because it was fun, yeah. But if everyone else thinks the Japanese fiction sections should be de-rhymed, then so be it. Let's take a vote. --DrSpengler 12:26, 8 February 2010 (EST)

I vote AGAINST rhyme in the Japanese section. It simply isn't appropriate for that incarnation of the character.--G.B. Blackrock 12:39, 8 February 2010 (EST)

I vote for it because I like the general theme of the page, it's fun, and because Wheelie only never rhymed because the Japanese language sucks at rhyming (same reason why their poems and music lyrics don't rhyme). The sentence structure just doesn't work in its favor. Just because the Japanese couldn't do it doesn't mean we should follow suit. English rocks at rhyming. --Detour 12:55, 8 February 2010 (EST)

Here's me voting for it, because if we're going to do a gag, we ought to be consistent with it throughout the article, or it looks half-assed. --Jeysie 13:33, 8 February 2010 (EST)

I vote for it. Keep it consistent or keep it out. ---Blackout- 13:38, 8 February 2010 (EST)

Just so there's no confusion, I am obviously for it. I think the rhymes make the article fun and I believe that having random non-rhyming chunks would break up the flow of the page. And doing it just because Wheelie didn't rhyme in certain continuities isn't worth killing the fun. --DrSpengler 13:40, 8 February 2010 (EST)

I vote for it. Keeps the page consistent and there's already someone willing to do it. - Cattleprod 14:00, 8 February 2010 (EST)

I vote AGAINST all the rhyme. Seriously, you ever sit down and try to exract information from this page? Imagine you're someone who knows nothing of Wheelie. After reading this I guarantee you'll know even less. User: Eire 18.59 8 Feb 2010

Hey, were you the guy who called a dude a schmuck for no real reason, and so then he quit this wiki because he was treated like shit? You don't get a vote. Especially since you think Florida and Cuba are separated by a friggin' river. (Anyway, I vote against rhyming in the Headmasters section.) --ItsWalky 14:07, 8 February 2010 (EST)

I vote against the rhyme, and note that when I first read this page, the break away from rhyming was hilarious... particularly because the text of the section was written in short, flat deliberately boring sentences to maximize the contrast. -Derik 14:08, 8 February 2010 (EST)

Yeah. I don't vote for the lack of rhyming in the Headmasters section for technicality reasons, but because it would be hilarious. Especially if it were written like a petulant little punk. --ItsWalky 14:09, 8 February 2010 (EST)

AGAINST btw. --ItsWalky 14:09, 8 February 2010 (EST)

I'm for it as I think it'd disrupt the flow, if it was only randomly rhyming.--TFDatabase

Whatever policy we adopt, it's not going to be random. If it rhymes, it's for a reason. If it doesn't rhyme (especially in specific sections), it's also for a reason.--G.B. Blackrock 15:03, 8 February 2010 (EST)

But it LOOKS random (at least before you know why it was done). Also, it seems weird that TFDatabase gets jumped on for using the same wording Spengs did earlier.Khajidha 15:10, 8 February 2010 (EST)

Just a fluke of timing. Nothing more. It's not like I'm constantly on the Wiki monitoring each and every comment that comes on.--G.B. Blackrock 16:03, 8 February 2010 (EST)

I vote for for the reasons already listed by so many others. Now, if you could find a way to do that section in haiku instead... Khajidha 14:35, 8 February 2010 (EST)

That idea is morbidly appealing. --Jeysie 14:50, 8 February 2010 (EST)

MWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!! Khajidha 14:57, 8 February 2010 (EST)

I'm for it. As Detour mentioned, Japanese sentence structures don't allow much room for rhyming and the rhyming is unique to Wheelie (like how SG Nightbeat's page is done in Edward G. Robinson's gangster character fashion).

(Haiku? Good grief...) --Lonegamer78 15:27, 8 February 2010 (EST)

...so I have an evil sense of humor. You won't hold it against me, will you? --Jeysie 17:44, 8 February 2010 (EST)

Not really, but I can imagine the chore of parsing everything down to 5-7-5. Heck, tanka might be a better option given its 5-7-5-7-7. --Lonegamer78 19:07, 8 February 2010 (EST)

I vote for the rhyming, for the reasons already given. Geewunling 15:41, 8 February 2010 (EST)

As do I, we have it noted that he didn't rhyme in other dubs anyway. Stevo 17:49, 8 February 2010 (EST)

I vote against rhyming in the Headmasters section. Having that section being assholey makes it even funnier, and Headmasters Wheelie is they guy who wouldn't go along with it simply to be a jerk. --FortMax 18:14, 8 February 2010 (EST)

I vote for rhyming, as otherwise we should probably stick a disclaimer at the start of the Headmasters section because you know others will come along and make it rhyme again later anyway.--MCRG Again 18:56, 8 February 2010 (EST)

Against rhyming, because the Headmasters section should read like the dialog of the show: boring and stating the obvious, repeatedly. (I'd be for haiku form, though) -Mazenoise 19:08, 8 February 2010 (EST)

I'm FOR rhyming because it'd flow badly otherwise. --M Sipher 19:13, 8 February 2010 (EST)

I would totally support rewriting Headmasters Wheelie in sarcastic Goth format, if it could be pulled off well. Otherwise.... eh. Having the rhyming is overkill. Not having it is inconsistent. Pick your poison! -- Repowers 21:16, 8 February 2010 (EST)

FOR rhyming. --Ascendron 21:23, 8 February 2010 (EST)

I declare voting over. I'd only be convinced to ditch Spengler's large amounts of work over a technicality is if voting were overwhelmingly in favor of it. Like, near-unanimous. And that certainly isn't the case, so the rhyming stays. --ItsWalky 21:54, 8 February 2010 (EST)

Yaayyy! I'm appreciated! I've got tomorrow off work so I'll knock out a few more episodes. If it's any consolation to those who voted against the rhymes, in order to write these fiction summaries I have to actually watch each episode. A most-terrible fate. So this is a very hollow victory for Spengler. --DrSpengler 22:44, 8 February 2010 (EST)

Okay, you know what? I seriously retract my earlier moan about the rhyming. Spengler is utterly rocking this, getting across all the relevant info in a way I never thought was possible. - Chris McFeely 07:58, 15 February 2010 (EST)

I'm cookin' MCs like a pound of bacon, yo. --DrSpengler 11:02, 15 February 2010 (EST)

Featured Article material?

So, I finally finished the thing. His every fiction section is completed, pics are plentiful and, so far as I know, his toy page is up to snuff (toys aren't my forte', I admit). Do you think this article is worthy of Featured Article status? --DrSpengler 18:04, 14 April 2010 (EDT)

Considering Walky already slapped the Featured template on it, apparently it is. ;)

(It's certainly the most impressive of our self-demonstrating articles, that's for damn sure.) --Jeysie 18:13, 14 April 2010 (EDT)

Aw jeez, somehow I completely missed that. My bad! Disregard this! (and thanks, Walky!) --DrSpengler 18:18, 14 April 2010 (EDT)

If we ever get the chance...

I'd love to see a picture of Wheelie being attacked by Decepticons on this article with the caption "Oh men of dark and dismal fate, forego your cruel employ! Have pity on my lonely state: I am an orphan boy!" (This is a quote from Gilbert & Sullivan's Pirates of Penzance, for the operatically ignorant.) I realize that there is no good picture for this caption as of now and that this will likely not happen, but I thought I'd just throw that out there. Also, kudos to those brave men and women who endeavored to write this article. You would make your English teachers proud.
- ¡Usa El Queso! 00:33, 21 April 2011 (EDT)

Wow

I can't even begin to imagine the effort that went into this. Truly epic! - LucidFox 10:29, 12 January 2012 (EST)

Generations toy caption ideas

I pity the fool who's no Meister retool!

I pity the fool who ain't a retool!

Reformatted to look like Meister? I think this body is much nicer!

I may look like Jazz, Stepper, Longarm (not Prime)--but do any of them ever bother to rhyme?

I used to be a Minicar; a Jazz retool is better by far!

A Jazz retool can never fail (as long as you ignore the scale)!

Rhymus 02:35, 26 September 2012 (EDT)

What rhymes with 'orange'?

1) This entry is amazing, but 2) all this and no joke about the notorious difficulty of rhyming the word 'orange'?--Dubbilex 03:29, 30 December 2012 (EST)

"Door-hinge". I learned that from the Muppets. --DrSpengler 13:06, 1 March 2013 (EST)

How about a rhyme for "purple"? "Urkel"? --Sabrblade 14:09, 1 March 2013 (EST)

Bloom County recommends "whore binge". Phasma Felis 16:49, 25 May 2013 (EDT)

I did it. —The Wadapan (talk) 01:23, 22 March 2022 (EDT)

Can we please tone down on the rhyming?

I get that a lot of you have spent a to of time and effort making this entire article rhyme, but can you guys please re-edit parts of this article to tone it down and remove the rhyming in some areas, specifically in the notes and toy section?

A little bit of rhyming would be fine, but to be blunt, the way the article is written is not pleasant to look at and the rhyming just makes the article feel like a chore to read. It gets tiring to read very quickly and I would rather have the information be just available rather then hidden under annoying rhymes.

If not, can we at least have a non-rhyming version of this available via suite, similar to how some of the character articles are split into multiple pages like Main, G1 Cartoon, Toys and Merchandise etc? That way, you can keep the rhyming versions for those who want and a non-rhyming for those who don't want to read this version?

Again, sorry for coming across as a buzz-kill, but I just find the article not fun to read and I don't want to decrypt rhymes just to read the trivia.Gretnablue (talk) 17:41, 22 November 2015 (EST)

I wouldn't mind a double of the article that doesn't rhyme. Information should always take precedence. --Ascendron (talk) 18:48, 22 November 2015 (EST)

Mmm... be careful with that. Make a version without the rhyming if you must, but who will govern that the information is the same between the two? Also... One of the reasons I love this Wikia to bits is how it doesn't take itself so seriously while it indeed provides way more than I ever wanted to know about Transformers. And sure, the meter is all over the place, but then again, Wheelie wasn't consistent, either. -- Jerryteacup, 30 December 2016

Also remember the huge bold text at the top of Talk:Main Page. - TBR (talk) 19:13, 30 December 2016 (EST)

There are other rhyming blokes, maybe they could make good jokes

We all know Wheelie's the master of rhymes,

But there are others that talk like that all the time!

There's Roadblock, Crackotage and even Choose Goose

And baddies like Grunty who like to let loose!

With that in mind, it could be fun

To reference these guys on "Wheelie (G1)".

There's even a trope entry one can look up

To see what character references one can cook up! --Samus Aran (talk) 09:29, 28 June 2017 (EDT)

Can we at least clear up some of this infomation on this article?

Looking above, it seems clear that the ryhming just isn't going away, but can we at least make the infomation clear? In someplaces, the ryhmes just feel like they get in the way or their is simply infomation just missing because you could figure out a way for it to rhyme. Like reading the toy section, next to the info about the G1 toy is a image of two colour variants, but the section mentions nothing on why. Similarly, the Titans Return starts going on about how it lacks a weapon, but since nearly all the others don't have weapons, why is this signifficant and why was it the only one that wasn't a shelfwarmer?

Also the Headmasters Manga section is rather unclear as well and so is the Armada bit in the Trivia section (what is the fact their excatly) and just all over, their are just ryhmes that don't make sense unless you already know what's it about (which makes it useless to newcomers)or just seem to be there for the sake of being there.

Honestly, this and a few others pages feel like you care more about in-jokes and being funny rather than being informative and just ended up looking elsewhere for the info I was looking gor Wheelie toys because I got sick of the ryhmes. TheGreenGardenOfTWST (talk) 04:39, 18 August 2017 (EDT)

I agree that, at this point, the article is difficult to read and the joke has been worn down. Blurr and Jorge Figueroa all have their joke idioms confined to the first section only, Liar Starscream is easy to understand, and Rewind's page goes back to normal for the IDW section where the story details actually mattered. Wheelie has been a pretty minor character everywhere and was probably least unimportant in the G1 cartoon and Headmasters (and did he even speak in rhyme in Headmasters?), so if there were a magic button we could press to turn those sections normal, I'd agree with it. But it's not worthwhile for anyone to trudge back now and try to regenerate it all in normal speech.... nor do I really think it will make any difference at this point if we say "as of Sept. 2017 this joke is over, we're writing his few and unimportant comic appearances non-rhymingly from this point on." So I guess... there's nothing we can do. But yeah, I agree, there should have been a line drawn. --Thylacine 2000 (talk) 08:36, 18 August 2017 (EDT)

Archiving and reformatting

It was brought up over a year ago on Discord that this article has become pretty problematic. I brought up the disccusion around that time in the community portal but it fell on deaf ears, so I figured it's time to try re-evaluating again.

My thoughts:

In my opinion, the article spends far too much time on the gimmick/joke, than actually providing any useful info. The article is hard to read or obtain any decent info out of because its sole focus is to make every section a rhyming stanza. I've personally found myself going in there multiple times (even before I signed up to the wiki), to find out something really quick and left with nothing, and instead had to spend several minutes to hours flicking through episodes of G1 or chapters of Legends or whatever myself to find out the information I was looking for, which is all very well when you have the source material at your disposal, but not a lot of people do, and that's typically why they come to the wiki in the first place. I get the joke and I'll admit that I found it funny when I first discovered the article however many years ago, but when you actually start to read it or pick it apart, you start to realize that it's not actually helpful at all and it becomes extremely obvious that most of the thought that's gone into it is "how can I make this rhyme?" and not "does this actually explain anything?". I'm not sure that is something we should be setting our main focus on as a wiki. I know that we've built a reputation for the article's format in the past by the wider internet fandom etc, but I don't think any of those people had really taken the time to see if what they're reading actually makes sense or tells them something worthwhile.

The other big issue I have is that it also makes it hard for users to contribute to in any way because everything has to be formulated in rhyme. A hypothetical situation I brought up last night whenever re-opening the year-old topic was: What if there happened to be one person who had done extensive research into something and was the only person to have that particular knowledge, but couldn't add it to the article because they can't word it into rhyme? Like, yeah, they could get someone else to do it, but then that becomes counterproductive and makes it inaccessible to users, which isn't exactly wiki-easy-and-accessible-to-anyone-friendly.

Discord's thoughts:

I don't want to speak too much for other people, but the general consensus so far has been to leave the rhyming for the intro paragraph and the image captions, while also archiving the article as it is now with a link at the bottom of the new article or wherever that preserves it as a piece of the wiki's history, that way we can keep at least some form of it, while also working to make it more informative.

Anyways, I've rambled on enough. Let the discussion commence! -- Fanofcoolstuff27 (talk) 20:22, 18 January 2022 (EST)

I agree. Get rid of the rhymes in at least the fiction section. Saix (talk) 16:08, 19 January 2022 (EST)

I think something similar to Tyroxia and Tyroxia/trans would be a good solution.—DDog (talk) 16:33, 19 January 2022 (EST)

The rhyming should be only the intro and the picture captions. Though I don't envy whoever has to wallow through and undo all of that... --Thylacine 2000 (talk) 17:24, 19 January 2022 (EST)

While I love the gimmick and I consider it pretty integral to the identity of the wiki... as a reader, i try to avoid this page and get any information i'd need from it elsewhere instead. so i think you have a point here, and some reevaluation of the gimmick is probably in order. -Foffy (talk) 18:13, 19 January 2022 (EST)

Entirely agreed with this. To quote myself on the Discord: "Yes, we like being The Funny Wiki, but when that gets in the way of Wheelie's page being actually informative or readable then I think that's the point at which the funny should not stay." --Riptide (talk) 18:42, 19 January 2022 (EST)

I do feel like the rhyming thing could in theory be fine, if it was just better, but a lot of it is neither clearly informative nor good poetry. To quote someone on the Discord, "Wheelies page has weak bars". I'm going to post Tindalos' pitch for how to handle it:

Once upon a time this page was made in verse,

We think the new one's fine, but just in case it's worse:

We ask you to forgive us, and that you shouldn't fear,

The archived version with the rhymes can be found right here.

This would be perfect imo. —The Wadapan (talk) 18:52, 19 January 2022 (EST)

Agree with removal. I could see leaving the lead and maybe the captions in rhyme, but wouldn't press too hard for either. --Khajidha (talk) 21:32, 19 January 2022 (EST)

Add another revise-and-archive from me as well. --Lonegamer78 (talk) 22:43, 19 January 2022 (EST)

You guys are nuts. The criticism that the page "gets in the way of Wheelie's page being actually informative or readable" loses the plot – this is a wiki about a plastic toy from the 1980s, and the Saturday morning commercial made to sell it to you. I signed up just to make this post, and hopefully that's understood as a meaningful vote form a long-time lurker, than an irrelevant vote from a non-entity. NOISEMAZE (talk) 12:27, 20 March 2022 (EDT)

Saying "this franchise is just about plastic toys" is not the great argument point you think it is, especially in contrast to the majority of articles that exist on this wiki besides this one. The writing on this page is strained. The toys section is a mess because of attempting to stay in the gimmick while being informative. The IDW section completely loses the nuance of Syndromica by forcing itself under this gimmick. What's "nuts," as you put it, is the fact that this article has continued to be kept in this poor condition long after the joke stopped being funny. Escargon (talk) 13:08, 20 March 2022 (EDT)

When you say it's "long after the joke stopped being funny," you're talking about how it's received with long-time wiki contributors who, presumably, Demand To Be Taken Seriously. It's a much more useful article in this form for general audiences who, in tiring themselves out in reading this article, eventually realize "wait, why am I reading a wiki article about, of all things, Wheelie?" If this was an article about a character of consequence, it would matter, but I make the 'toy commercial' argument because in this context, it's a strong one. "The IDW section completely loses the nuance of Syndromica" is a set of words that has no meaning to me, so I can enjoy this article for what it is, whereas you're concerned people cannot read up about Wheelie lore. Bless your heart. --NOISEMAZE (talk) 16:15, 20 March 2022 (EDT)

You have to remember that there is a larger audience that may want to read this article for actual info. Taking your thoughts and opinions on the matter is valuable, but it seems you're not exactly the general audience we were talking about. Yes, Wheelie is an annoying rhyming character in the G1 cartoon, which was a glorified commercial, but the majority of his other appearances aren't like that (e.g. IDW or JG1). The peeps working on the Cyberverse cartoon were all told by Hasbro to come to the wiki for info on characters, because Hasbro doesn't keep any in-house info themselves. So that's another aspect we need to take into consideration: "Is it readable for people who know nothing about Transformers and are actually needing info for future cartoons or films?" -- Fanofcoolstuff27 (talk) 20:44, 20 March 2022 (EDT)

Alright, first off, don't be fucking cute; it's not endearing, and unlike others here, I'm not nearly as willing to let shit slide. I'm not gonna take any crap from someone whose just signed up to talk shit. Second off, your argument about Wheelie being a "character of no consequence" utterly falls apart when there's hundreds, if not thousands, of articles who could equally be argued to be of the same level of importance and yet who have perfectly normal articles otherwise. Third off, and this is related to the second point, if your whole reasoning for keeping this the way it is boils down to "why should I read an article that is about Wheelie" then why the fuck are you even reading the wiki at all? Escargon (talk) 20:48, 20 March 2022 (EDT)

Fanofcoolstuff and Escargon are right on all points, Noisemaze. And for the record, joining just to antagonize longtime editors (some of whom were responsible or the page as it is now) is not a good look, so I suggest you dial it back lest your stay here be a very short one. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 21:14, 20 March 2022 (EDT)

Yes, Fanofcoolstuff brings up great points. Escargon has slid into vulgarities and condescension in a manner typical of their typical post history, and it's probably worth reviewing whether that behavior is a normal way of interacting with a new member. No one is going to have a good impression of a wiki if their first interaction with a 'longtime editor' is unchecked smarminess. NOISEMAZE (talk) 01:14, 21 March 2022 (EDT)

Pot, meet kettle. And for the record, our policy has always been "We're informative first, funny second." If the humor gets in the way of conveying information in a way that people can easily understand, it has to go. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 03:35, 21 March 2022 (EDT)

I only started "sliding into vulgarities and condescension" when you decided to be overly familiar and smarmy yourself. You're the one who started off this whole situation by declaring everyone was nuts for making this proposal. By the way, you're whole disaffected "I don't really care about Transformers" shtick would come across a whole lot stronger if it wasn't for the fact that clearly you know enough to know who Noisemaze is. Grow up. Escargon (talk) 08:02, 21 March 2022 (EDT)

Alright, I think we've been at each other's throats enough now. Can we get back to the topic at hand in a much more civilized manner? So far the majority of votes have been for a change in the article's current format, but I'd be interested to see what Walky or any of the other bigshots have to say on the matter. The sooner we can get the ball rolling on this the better, because Wheelie hasn't appeared in anything too recently (as far as I'm aware) so making the changes before any new info needs adding might be the best time to do it, just to avoid any potential editing conflicts that may occur during such an overhaul. -- Fanofcoolstuff27 (talk) 09:10, 21 March 2022 (EDT)

That weird little diversion aside, everyone seems in agreement on how to handle things: Leave the lead and captions in rhyme, rewrite everything else in prose, and archive the old version. If anyone wants to get started on de-rhyming it, more power to them. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 15:08, 21 March 2022 (EDT)

I'd like to dedicate this song to my greatest inspiration: Rhymezone dot com

The tide seems firmly against this page as it stands, and I agree that a "laconic" (to use the TVTropes term) version of the page needs to exist. I was fully on the side of just archiving the page, because until just this evening, I could break down the total word count of the article like this: 50% of it is salient information about Wheelie. The other 50% is ramblings people wrote to rhyme with that first 50%. So, y'know, obviously the page wasn't working, people would come in when a new toy was announced, dash off a few lines and forget about it.

However. I think Noisemaze raised a salient point that, outside our specific group of people that really care about Transformers, if people know about the TFWiki, the Wheelie page is probably the thing they know about it. It's a single joke dragged out to the point of absurdity, on perhaps the most significant "joke character" of the original movie everyone saw, the toy advert cartoon, saying: don't take this seriously. People put a lot of thought into making the joke happen, and it feels vaguely disresepectful to go in with a hatchet to try and make the joke work, but I guess it feels like that's the lesser evil compared to squirrelling the whole thing away into some subpage, so. I thought I'd give it a go, to give the page one last shot at surviving.

As a proof of concept I've done a major editing pass over the intro, the fiction section (solely through to the end of FFOD—I'll do the rest if people are onboard), the toy section, and the notes. I have cut as much of the bullshit as possible. I have tried to use clear sentence flow and position the key elements of each statement on the rhyme, in the hopes that the rhyme scheme might even complement the information being communicated. My metre's generally pretty poor, sorry about that—hopefully it's still an improvement. I did the fiction stuff in 2019, but I remember checking the primary sources at the time. Genuinely, I don't think in the stuff I touched there's any meaningful info missing that a laconic version of the page would somehow include: if you spot omissions, please raise them, but if nobody does I think the "the rhyming article will necessarily omit key information" argument falls apart. Heck, there's some stuff that was missing which I've now added, while still being more succinct.

The other major argument against the page, aside from some people just finding it annoying to read (a laconic version fixes this whether it's the primary or secondary version of the page), is that the rhyme scheme is obstructive to new editors. This is a fair point, but my counterargument is that I don't think it's that hard—I put a header namedropping Rhymezone for a reason, and this lil rewrite took a few hours max—and there are some things which are just worth the bit of extra hassle, y'know? Besides, it's not like there's gonna be any major revelations about Universe Wheelie—or any existing Wheelie—any time soon that are going to need existing sections to be edited at all; once they're up to scratch, that's that. Plus, it's seriously worth considering that this is the kind of page that might inspire people to join in with contributing in the first place. Anyway, yeah—does this change any hearts and minds? —The Wadapan (talk) 01:23, 22 March 2022 (EDT)

I remember bringing up on Discord the option to have two variants of the article running simaltaneously, but the majority of voices (iirc) suggested it would be better just to toss the whole thing, which I can see now makes sense because users are always going to gravitate more towards whatever the easiest version of the article to edit is to them, which means some other poor user is still going to have to fill the holes in the other one. Some users (especially new ones) may also not notice that there are two different variants of the article, especially if they've only visited one and not the other, that's part of the reason why we started playing around with transcluded fiction sections for copied info in separate articles, because if one gets edited, the other is bound to be forgotten about due to the user not knowing the same exact info word-for-word exists in another article (e.g. Sixshot/Greatshot's Victory cartoon section).

But for me now, I still think my mind is unchanged. We're not the same wiki from the 00's that did things for shits and giggles. We've matured and evolved, when compared to the wiki's early days where offensive "edgy" humour was a thing that happened on the regular (I'm not saying Wheelie's article is offensive, it's just an example of the ways that we've grown since the rhyming was first implemented). I also really hate to keep coming back to this point, because it really is stupid that we've become the unpaid Hasbro archive database workers, but I feel we also need to keep in mind how often Hasbro and their licensees etc. frequent this wiki for information, because if something gets screwed up along the way due to a joke that has taken over the page and its info, then that L unfortuantely falls on us too for not providing the accurate info that Hasbro or whoever else is looking for. There are other ways for us to still be funny, I just don't think the funny needs to engulf everything useful with it. -- Fanofcoolstuff27 (talk) 04:02, 22 March 2022 (EDT)

While I agree that conveying information has to be our first priority, I think Wads' edits have made the page a lot more digestible. If the rest can be sufficiently cleaned up to flow much better, I don't see a huge issue with leaving this as the primary version of the page, so long as we also have a secondary laconic version available with a very visible link to it right at the top of the page. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 04:32, 22 March 2022 (EDT)

I'm all for retaining Wadapan's cleaner, better-flowing rhyming version as the main. I mean, I periodically check the socials when I'm bored, and Wheelie's page being in rhyme STILL gets brought up as one of the things that people who aren't super-duper-invested in this love and cite as one of the reasons this wiki is "the best". I dunno about you, but it feels like killing that is... not great.

The only caveat is I might argue that, for layout reasons, it might be best to halve the page's "physical" length by putting the two rhyming lines as a single line. The white space has always rankled, I just never had the energy to go about fixing that since it'd also have likely involved, well, what Wadapan is doing now. --M Sipher (talk) 04:42, 22 March 2022 (EDT)

That's a good idea. I'll do it now for the main body, but leave the captions split into two lines since that makes more sense for the limited space of the image box. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 04:49, 22 March 2022 (EDT)

"Anyway, yeah—does this change any hearts and minds?" No, not particularity in my case. I still feel like the more time that goes on, and as more things happen with Wheelie, the more we bend over backwards to make this article work. Escargon (talk) 06:47, 22 March 2022 (EDT)

I'd been on the fence, but wads' rewrites have sufficiently convinced me that it's viable to keep the rhyming on the main version. I agree with Sipher that the article does have a lot of value as a sort of "mascot page", and it's worth trying our best to "save" it, even if it does represent a bit more effort than the average article. Jalaguy (talk) 08:08, 22 March 2022 (EDT)

I personally think we're still straining the amount of people who can edit the article though. Just because Wads can write better rhymes, doesn't mean all of the other average wiki users can, which still defeats the purpose of a wiki which is supposed to be easy enough for anyone to pick up. When a bunch of long-time users have come out saying that they either actively avoid editing or reading the article, that's when I feel we need to start taking these things into consideration. I also can't see Wads or anyone else wanting to dedicate a huge chunk of their time on a single article for the rest of eternity because no one else can do it, especially given that the majority of edits from the last few years have mostly been typo and link fixes or adding foreign names and voice actors (things that don't involve rhyming at all), hence why the article has been in poor shape for the longest time—it's because no one wants to do it! Lol. If we really want to keep this as the "mascot article" and keep all of the rhyming, then there also has to be someone or a team of someones willing to keep it to the same standard anytime something new is added, otherwise the article we're trying to convince everyone can rhyme, make sense and be informative, yet doesn't follow any of this criteria because no one is regularly checking up on new edits with poor attempts at rhyming by other people who aren't so good at it, then this attempt at salvaging the article would just be in vain and we'd just be back here re-opening the discussion in another year or so (just look at the rest of this talk page, this isn't the first time the topic of de-rhyming has been brought up).

Also quick sidenote: if the leaks are true, we are likely to get a Core Class (fully transformable) '86 Wheelie in Studio Series at some point in the not too distant future, so we'll have another toy to list, which could also potentially lead to more fiction via JG1 or IDW2 or any other concurrent piece of fiction that may use toy-accurate artwork in it. -- Fanofcoolstuff27 (talk) 09:24, 22 March 2022 (EDT)

Is there anything stopping those editors from adding the stuff immediately to the laconic version, and then throwing a stub template on the main version saying "Though we haven't quite yet written up this verse, on / The other page there's already a laconic version"? But I bet that wouldn't even be necessary. I wouldn't dedicate a huge chunk of my time to this article forever, but what I was saying is that I'm making an easy gamble that there won't be major G1 Wheelie content (i.e., if he shows up in a cartoon or movie, that'll be on its own continuity page, and new toys are less than once a year on average). There's a possibility that a hypothetical new comic would, for some reason, give Wheelie a star turn, and even that would be an issue a month max for a limited time. But why would you scrap the article now, based on that hypothetical, instead of just revisiting it when it matters? The only reason I didn't do this back in 2019 was that I felt vaguely uncomfortable rewriting so much of what people had already done, and when I started, people were lukewarm on the idea, so. Evidently I should've just gone ahead and done it! If it's what it takes to keep the page live, no really, please do @ me for the rest of time whenever there's new content with the funy little guy. Like I say, I think some things are worth a bit of extra work. —The Wadapan (talk) 09:56, 22 March 2022 (EDT)

I think people are VASTLY overestimating the amount of future editing this page is gonna need. Like, ever. Seriously, most of these pages go a very, very, very long time untouched outside of some technical editing like link-fixing. --M Sipher (talk) 17:44, 22 March 2022 (EDT)

For all the talk about people seeing this as a "mascot" article, there's plenty of evidence above that multiple, non-longtime editors and readers are equally frustrated with this article being the way it is. If we're gonna take outside opinion into any consideration into this article, we really shouldn't say that reception on this article comes down one way or another. My frustration with this page has always been that it's impossible to talk about anything in any substantive detail, and IDW's section in particular. You can say that he's a minor character and as such it doesn't matter, but we have hundreds of character articles about those who have done less and are more detailed than this. Escargon (talk) 13:15, 22 March 2022 (EDT)

Yeah, I think people are getting way too attached to some online comments that clearly didn't care about how informative the article actually is. Saix (talk) 15:25, 22 March 2022 (EDT)

The "outside" opinion on this article is decidedly that it's funny. Internally there's a split. I haven't gotten to IDW's section yet, but I've been working through the Sunbow cartoon today, and I've very much proven that it is not at all "impossible" to communicate substantive detail here. Check out the summary for "Surprise Party" I've just finished, and tell me—what have I missed? If anything, there's too much granular detail now, the kind of thing we've scrubbed from other write-ups—but I think it's an accurate, efficient, and readable summary of a 20 minute effectively-spotlight on Wheelie, one of the most substantive roles he's had. Surely the same treatment for the likes of Syndromica would be acceptable? —The Wadapan (talk) 17:19, 22 March 2022 (EDT)

Look at the contributions above from the likes of "Gretnablue" and "TheGreenGardenOfTWST", one of who has only edited one other article, and one whose only contribution is on this talk page. And that's just two people who decided to sign up here, I'm sure if I went to look elsewhere I could find plenty more. There is no "decidedly" here. I think it's utterly ridiculous that we're prioritizing "what looks funny to outsiders" over "is this article easy for those actually contributing to the wiki to work with?" As for how it is; yes, it technically flows better and is inclusive in its details, but I still find it incredibly annoying to read in such a manner. I can say for my part that if I want to find out something Wheelie's done in a story for any of the annotations I've written up, I would sooner go to the story page than go to this article. Escargon (talk) 17:23, 22 March 2022 (EDT)

Re: "The outside opinion", I think there's a difference between finding this page a funny novelty and actually trying to read it. I don't think anybody commenting on the funny actually cares about deriving useful information on Wheelie. Saix (talk) 18:01, 22 March 2022 (EDT)

I second this. --Khajidha (talk) 07:59, 23 March 2022 (EDT)

A rhyming Wheelie page is our IDENTITY. If that's not a tone that you like then I would very strongly suggest you find another wiki somewhere. I hear they're free on Wikia, go start your own.--ItsWalky (talk) 18:20, 22 March 2022 (EDT)

I mean, the tone isn't ever what people've had a problem with--it's purely a matter of practicality and not making the page actively painful to read with awful rhymes that don't convey the required information. Wads' rewrites are a significant improvement, but I'm still not entirely convinced that it's a permanent solution. --Riptide (talk) 19:15, 22 March 2022 (EDT)

Would you be opposed to a boring version of the page suited out, or would that be an okay compromise? —The Wadapan (talk) 19:41, 22 March 2022 (EDT)

I agree with both Saix and Broadside's latest statements. I would also be fine with an easier version of the article to edit, but what I said last night about contributions only ever being made to one version of the article over the other, is a very real scenario that will most likely happen, which means one could potentially end up being a stub for a very long time until someone notices. It just seems like a lot of upkeep that'll only cause more problems in the future. -- Fanofcoolstuff27 (talk) 20:01, 22 March 2022 (EDT)

Has anyone else ever read an old book that had those chapter introductory paragraphs? (Like "Chapter 1 - In which our hero buys a croissant and goes to work.") I was thinking that each fiction section could have a short quatrain summing up Wheelie in that continuity, followed by a detailed prose write up. Does that sound interesting to anyone else? --Khajidha (talk) 07:59, 23 March 2022 (EDT)

PS - super short sections could still be all poetry. --Khajidha (talk) 08:00, 23 March 2022 (EDT)

Do you think you could whip up something in a sandbox as an example of how it would look for a fiction section? Doesn't have to be anything fancy if you're not that well versed in rhyming, but you've kinda peaked my interest lol. -- Fanofcoolstuff27 (talk) 08:07, 23 March 2022 (EDT)

Ooo, I just had an idea myself, what if we kept the writing and made a collapsible element under each section with a full in-depth prose version of the write up? (aka the "boring" version). That way it saves on having two versions of the article and readers can still have the option to read an easier to understand version. I'll whip up a proof of concept in a sandbox myself, and if it is given the green light, we could possibly look at converting that collapsible code into a template to save on page size, otherwise a bunch of full lines of collapsible code, along with the write up, is gonna beef the page up real quick. -- Fanofcoolstuff27 (talk) 08:18, 23 March 2022 (EDT)

Alright, as stated above, here is my proof of concept. The first example is just having the collapsible element with no text, just the "[Expand]" box, while the second example includes a small piece of text indicating what the collapsible element is for. "Transcript" may not be the right word I'm looking for, but as the sandbox states, it's 2 AM here at the moment, so I'm pretty tired. Let me know your thoughts on this idea. -- Fanofcoolstuff27 (talk) 09:02, 23 March 2022 (EDT)

I'm not in favor of multiple versions of the page nor multiple versions of any section of it. Any of that would just increase the editing overhead even more. The only solution that would lighten said load is to trash or archive the rhyming version and we can't do that, so I say the rhyming should stay as-is. Iacon0 (talk) 09:23, 23 March 2022 (EDT)

Two pages is preferable if we absolutely have to keep the rhyme joke. Escargon (talk) 09:35, 23 March 2022 (EDT)

I'm personally now ambivalent as to whether there should be a laconic version at all. From the perspective of the camp that thinks there shouldn't, the concrete benefit of this proposal is that the rhyming/boring versions will be side by side in the editor window, in theory reinforcing that both should be kept in sync. From the perspective that thinks there should be a laconic version somehow, I think Version 1 is really neat, unobtrusive, and effective, though the drawback is that a reader who finds the rhyming stuff annoying would probably have to hit "expand" a bunch of times for each part individually, which seems extremely annoying in its own right...? So, neutral vote, just weighing the effects as I see them. (Getting more into subjective stuff, I do think it seems quite... insecure, to have tons of little marks on the page saying "haha,,,, just kidding"? Part of the idea behind the page, in my eyes, is that it gets the reader to engage with Wheelie's language, see the world as he sees it.) —The Wadapan (talk) 10:53, 23 March 2022 (EDT)

You're last part is where I have to disagree. The point of the wiki, irregardless of whether it engages with humor or not, is to provide information about concepts, characters, series, etc. first and foremost. It's one thing to have a joke page (which, I should note, I've never minded the proposal to have two versions of the article, just so long as the prose one is linked and prominent), but to treat this article as some sort of chance to implement a "storytelling device" completely conflicts with the wiki's mission statement. Our goal isn't getting readers to see how Wheelie sees; our goal is to give our readers information about who Wheelie is, what he's done in fiction, what toys he's had, and what behind-the-scenes information is on him. And if we come at this from the perspective of "how Wheelie sees the world" (which again I'm very much against), what do we do then for areas like the Headmasters, where he does not rhyme? Escargon (talk) 11:00, 23 March 2022 (EDT)

I'm saying that I personally think the device is by nature informative. But yeah, you've already made it quite clear you personally see no value in the gimmick, so I won't argue that further. As for Headmasters... do we even have a decent translation of the show? Because if not, I'm not sure I'll be able to do much with those sections. Thankfully from a rhyme perspective they're already pretty readable, the question is whether they're comprehensive on an information level. Seeing as he doesn't rhyme in that series, I guess I'd be fine with them specifically being in normal prose, sure, but that still requires someone who's able to sit down with the primary source. —The Wadapan (talk) 11:30, 23 March 2022 (EDT)

The currently available Headmasters subs are adequate for writing up character summaries ("Wheelie went to X", etc.). You just can't put too much stock in dialogue specifics. Saix (talk) 12:52, 23 March 2022 (EDT)

I’m not arguing about the gimmick at this point, I recognize that it’s not going anywhere soon. What I’m against is the notion of this or any article using a gimmick as a story-telling device, because I think it’s against the wiki’s purposes. In any case, I am absolutely against us ditching a prose format article; I’ve pushed for it for years and I’m not giving up on it now, even if it has to exist alongside the rhyming page. Escargon (talk) 16:54, 23 March 2022 (EDT)

So it's been over a month, I'm not gonna pretend we're going to change the main page anytime soon, but I sure would like to see the regular version be something that's implemented and not be something that, you know, is thrown out after years of people pushing for it because we suddenly changed our minds at the last possible second. Escargon (talk) 00:10, 8 May 2022 (EDT)

Escargon, I agree with you, and I have my own complaints about this page related to my eyes and how they have an issue that makes it really hard to sit and read this page. If you want help sandboxing a new "normal" page DM me on Discord and we can start working on something. My user is the same on the server as it is here. Paladin Denn (talk) 01:48, 8 May 2022 (EDT)

It's been another month or so. Escargon (talk) 10:34, 15 June 2022 (EDT)

I keep bringing this up because I flat-out refuse to give up on this issue that I have been fighting half a decade to address just because we came up with a better rhyme scheme for the page. I've begged and pleaded for a prose version of this page for years. Escargon (talk) 10:35, 17 June 2022 (EDT)

Ultimately, like everything else on the wiki, it comes down to someone having both the time and energy to actually do it, and the amount of both required to completely redo the page from scratch is a big ask of anyone. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 10:14, 17 June 2022 (EDT)

Right now I'm not wanting anyone to go ahead right away and do it, I'm just want to make sure we have official permission so that when someone does get around to it everyone will be on the same page. Escargon (talk) 07:50, 7 July 2022 (EDT)

(And, you know, everyone was ready to go ahead with de-rhyming until the slightest amount of backlash.) Escargon (talk) 21:20, 12 July 2022 (EDT)

You don't need permission to start a sandbox. You're more than welcome to try your hand at building one, and it's a lot easier to make a point about the effectiveness of a second page if you have a proof of concept for comparison. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 21:31, 12 July 2022 (EDT)

I'm not asking for permission about a sandbox, I'm asking so that someone doesn't come along and freak out later when the work has already been mostly done, because every single time a big change like this one happens, someone does when the work is 90% finished. The moving of portions of GoBots and IDW Hasbro stuff on the wiki, the moving of the various JG1 characters to a consistent (G1) identifier, and so on; I don't want to sit through an argument over this. Escargon (talk) 17:54, 16 July 2022 (EDT)

Forget it. Whatever, man. This isn't going anywhere and I'm not going to waste time on it when all I get on here is grief. Escargon (talk) 19:17, 29 July 2022 (EDT)

Please... I literally created an account to BEG somebody to make a prose version of this page.

I have mild dyslexia and this page is utterly impossible for me to read- I have absolutely no idea what this character is, other than somebody put some admittedly hard work into making this page impossible to read. Is he a child? Why is this written like this when he's not always a character that rhymes? Why can't the rhyming jokes just stay to the image description texts, like so many other jokes on other pages? Please. I can see this has been a point of contention on the site before- but I am a user that has been combing this site rather religiously for the last year, and this is the only page I absolutely have zero comprehension for. It's like trying to read Beowulf- it's not meant to be a silent story, it's meant to be orated, and when it's simply written, it's... too much. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Quasarwake (talk • contribs){{#if:| {{{2}}}|}}.

The rhyming is nice in brief, but as a dyslexic...ouch. it took me about 40 minutes to try to unscramble the word placement of the rhymes, so I don't feel comfortable letting my kid who also has my same learning disabilities read this entry. Please just make the archive version rhyme and link to it, or reduce it to captions and headers maybe?? I'm sorry if this request offends. Thank you. --Automatonic (talk) 21:21, 15 December 2025 (EST)

As you can see above, there is support for the creation of a second, "laconic" version of the page that removes the rhymes and renders everything in normal prose for ease of reading, which can exist in parallel to the rhyming version. Unfortunately, fully rewriting a whole page of this length is a huge task, and no one has yet stepped up to do so. Regardless, we'd welcome anyone who's willing to actually sit down and start creating a more straightforward version in their sandbox, which can be moved to the mainspace once it's finished. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 22:59, 15 December 2025 (EST)

I see that someone has already started drafting a sandbox, so I just wanted to add to what Cyberlink420 has said—we've been aware of the accessibility issues the page poses for some time, and I think most people are open to the idea of an alternate "laconic" version (to use the TV Tropes term) that does not rhyme! But I'd like to make it clear that (unless a lot of people have changed their minds since previous discussions) this wouldn't be a replacement or revamp for the page in its current form, but rather an accessibility aid made available separately for the users who need it. —wadapan (talk) 13:59, 16 December 2025 (EST)