User talk:Geewunling/Futurama

I am not sure I see the point of a page to collect all the Futurama references in Transformers. Futurama itself hasn't actually appeared in TF fiction, unlike, say, The Honeymooners. --Monzo 14:53, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

Agreed. And honestly, I'm seeing this as a sign of a problem that's been really blatant these last few days... artificial, ugly bloating of article count. We're seeing cute wink-and-nudge offhand references get articles that imbue no information whatsoever that can't be done with a Trivia note on the page they came from. It's one thing for a one-note TF-original character to get their own page, but we're talking about pages for offhanded pop-culture references from the margins of things! At least the TF one-note character is much, much more likely to be relevant again to some piece of fiction, enough to justify a page. I really think we need to look at some culling here. --M Sipher 14:59, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

As an author who delights in off-handed and hidden references, I have to agree. O.C.P. and We Made It are probably not page-worthy. I think, as a good rule of thumb, if we have nothing to say about X other than 'X exists' then X usually shouldn't get an article.--Jimsorenson 15:04, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

We're arguing against making individual pages for tiny details in OUR OWN WORKS. What does THAT say? --M Sipher 15:15, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

I dunno, I'd say O.C.P. and We Made It are article-worthy, but not Futurama, since it's never been directly brought up in Transformers fiction. --Detour 15:19, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

I tend to agree with Jim on this one. Unless it's somehow extremely notable and, say, linked from a handful of other articles, any page comprising less than a picture and/or a couple paragraphs should probably folded into something else.Shellspark 15:32, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

I'm somewhere in the middle with Detour: while many of these minor mentions could be pages, there hasn't been a direct mention of Futurama so it shouldn't have a page of its own here. --Khajidha 15:35, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

I don't think you guys realize how much things on this wiki are (or were, before the Almanacs reused them) here just because somebody mentioned it in a throwaway line or they showed up once (E'brutoc, Frijoles, Xal, Jabbi-Ko, Orga, Ciech, Airachnid's specimens, etc., etc.). The resistance against those that just happen to be references is silly. All that should concern us is whether they exist in the Transformers brand; drawing a line in the sand about who gets in the article club is pointless and wastes our time.

On-topic: I don't think articles like this should exist. —Interrobang 15:44, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

For what it's worth, before the AAII, I'd argue that E'Brutoc, Xal, Jabbi-Ko, and Orga should not have existed. Ciech I think still shouldn't exist. I don't have an opinion about the specimens, and Frijoles seems legit to me.--Jimsorenson 15:47, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

Those are TRANSFORMERS-ORIGINAL ITEMS(or, in the case of frijoles, a joke of dubious merit). There is a difference between that and an offhand jokey mention. TF-original stuff has the potential to get re-used in a greater capacity, especially nowadays (Tritanium MechTech weapons, anyone?). As for "drawing a line in the sand", we do that all the fucking time. --16:49, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

Why are we basing article admittance on hypotheticals? —Interrobang 17:58, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

How would anybody who hasn't read or watched the relevant media know about them if articles didn't exist? I sure wouldn't have known what Xal was if that article didn't exist years ago; limiting the reader's scope of Transformers to only things that contain subjectively enough information isn't going to help anything. —Interrobang 16:00, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

Why the hell would they be looking for "Futurama" or "O.C.P." on the TF wiki anyway? Where in the hell would they even get that idea, save for the page for the source of said reference? --M Sipher 16:49, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

...A big part of wikis is stumbling around and looking at random stuff. You could say this about anything that wasn't a main character or a series. —Interrobang 17:58, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

I don't think it's possible for you to have come up with a lamer, weaker justification than that. Do people routinely go the the Super Mario wiki and search for information on Harry Potter there? Is there a trend of looking on the World of Warcraft wiki to find out what connections it might have to Buffy the Vampire Slayer? Why don't we just make pages for everything ever referred to ever in any TF piece? Hell, if we're shooting for such random, unlikely occurrences as the scenario above, why not pages on everything ever? We never know when someone might come here and do a search for some Bollywood musical or cane toads. --M Sipher 18:13, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

I thought I was attacking your argument of "People won't search for X!" in regards to things that appeared in Transformers material, but if setting up straw men makes you feel better, then okay. —Interrobang 19:02, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

Except people -notably TF creators who are not part of our editor base- WILL search for broad categories of amazingly obscure TF-original content, like deities, materials, planets, special weapons, excessively minor characters, etc. We know this for concrete fact. There's not going to be searches for whatever piece of external pop culture that might in an infinite universe have gotten mentioned once in TFs. There's no straw men being set up on my part, you laid it all out right there, flailing badly trying to justify page bloat that serves no purpose whatsoever. --M Sipher 19:12, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

As opposed to your obsession with whether somebody will type something in the search box to justify why fictional entities that have appeared in Transformers don't warrant attention by the technicality of being a reference when we've always had those kind of pages. The concept of browsing a wiki with no direction and just seeing what's in the brand seems to be completely foreign to you. —Interrobang 11:18, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

Oh don't even. If we're going to play that game, the concept of not making this wiki an overly-obtuse dumping ground of pointless micro-pages sure seems to sail over your skull. This page really does serve no purpose other than to say "look TFs can make references to this thing I like!", and opens the door to a lot more pointless dumping-ground pages. --M Sipher 14:12, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

Then again, I never intended this page to be something sought for, just as much as I don't think that's the case for a ton of pages, like Badman, Superman, Holy Frijoles etc. Those pages have less of a right to exist based on content it seems, but exist because they got name-dropped. I think that's an ill argument if only because that'd mean I can slap a noname template on this page to make everyone theoretically happy. Not to mention that I've seen a number of pages that could be made once the subject got namedropped that got a good amount of links to them and content dropped in them that was sorta hovering around all that time to be grouped. I am cool with our "has to be named" policy, but I think there's limits if it impedes the tfwiki's ability to provide information. Pondering on it for a few more hours, I do think this page is a problem in that it creates a need to qualify the necessary prominence of an external franchise to be given a page. I'm not sure whether it outweighs the superior information supply, but both don't need to be comprimised if we'd turn this into a page on the way external franchises have influenced or influence Transformers more than once. I don't think it would be too long a page and I don't think it would be outside the scope of the wiki either. Geewunling 11:05, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

Thumbs down to this article, but about having pages for tiny name-dropped Transformers tidbits: Does any one person know all the places in all the Transformer fictions that that item may have appeared in? Maybe someone else knows about somewhere else that thing appeared. If someone comes across the planet Craxxxorzzz in a comic and makes a page for it then someone else remembers seeing that planet somewhere else and adds that info in, it becomes a collaborative effort. Or if the planet Craxxxorzzz appears in something new we already have its known history.- Starfield 13:43, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

I am completely unable to understand why people would have a problem with this page. There's a good number of references to Futurama in TF fiction (to the point I'd call it an epidemic), all of which get acknowledged on individual pages. What's against making it easy for the readers interested in these to get an overview of all Futurama references easily? It's not like this page treats itself as more canon than that (for instance, I refrained from adding any voice actors beyond the one with the quote). I wouldn't object to making this page bigger to deal with all (significant by numbers) references to external franchises by franchise, but I think going for a minimalist "only note individual references and let our readers figure out on their own if there are more" is just... counter-intuitive. Plus, I hate having so many same links to Wikipedia, as it makes this wiki more dependent on what happens over there. Geewunling 16:08, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

Should we have a Shakespeare article to list all of the references to his works in Transformers? Because there are a lot of them. And how many pop culture references does it take before the source qualifies for an article to list them all? These are questions that should be addressed in conjunction with deciding whether to keep this article. Because it opens a door. --KilMichaelMcC 16:42, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

EXACTLY. --M Sipher 16:49, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

I wouldn't object to a Shakespeare references section (or article) either. Seems like there are enough to warrant such. Geewunling 16:58, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

I can't justify an article like this. I don't think I'd go along with a Shakespeare article either, because it's not germane enough to Transformers. If they were a part of the essence of a continuity's fiction, then it might be justified. Otherwise, such a page doesn't serve much purpose because I'd wager that very few people would be looking for a list of all the references to a particular entity. Conversely, things like O.C.P. and We Made It, are fictional entities whose names happen to be references. Thus, they are worthy of page or at least a collective page. Something like "Animated Continuity planets" or "Animated Continuity businesses". Those probably aren't the best names, but you get the idea. --Tigerpaw28 19:52, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

Perhaps if "Futurama" the show, itself was brought up in TF media, then this page would make sense, much like, say, the Madonna page, but the fact that this is a list of different references to something totally outside of TF makes it seem like it's one too many degree's removed. I'm not against mentioning the references on their own pages. If someone typed "Futurama" in the search box, a list would still appear, but this is just opening up a floodgate since everything refers to something.Riddlerj 11:03, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

This page is like pages like Madonna or 40-Year-Old Virgin. And I wouldn't mind if there is a page for Shakespeare. --TX55^TALK 11:07, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

This page isn't like either one of those pages, because those pages document things mentioned in Transformers fiction. No one has actually mentioned Futurama in that way. This page is a list of references made by writers, not in-universe references made by characters. --KilMichaelMcC 11:15, 12 August 2011 (EDT)--KilMichaelMcC 11:15, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

Oops, I didn't look closely enough. Huh.

Well, in that case, some contents can be moved to Notes section in character pages or Real-word references in story pages. --TX55^TALK 11:50, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

"are fictional entities whose names happen to be references"—This. We've always had stuff like Madonna, Hogwarts, The Honeymooners, Jesus, and a good part of Category:Earth culture. The debate about "reference" articles is a little late.

In regards to this particular article, I'm not for it, but I'm not that bothered by its existence. As long as it doesn't lead to an article with every Transformer reference in external media. —Interrobang 11:18, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

The argument put forth by Kil sums up my original issue: Futurama, the TV show, has not itself been directly referenced within a work of Transformers fiction. Ergo, I do not feel we need a page for Futurama, because while all these references exist, we are not in the business of cataloging Futurama references. The list would make a reasonable blog post or addition for a Futurama wiki, but I do not think it has a place here. --Monzo 11:26, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

If we do delete this page, I think it should be preserved as an user page in case Futurama itself shows up later. —Interrobang 11:56, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

Aye.

If the page got deleted, perhaps we can simply move it as the creator as an user subpage, so the history can be preserved. --TX55^TALK 12:00, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

Proposal attempt #3 or 4

Yeah, moving this out of M Sipher's and Interrobang's little catfight: I get that people are against this page as it currently is because of the doors it opens. Would it be a solution to ditch the continuity headers and turn the page into a section of a bigger page dealing with the largest external franchises that have been referenced in/influenced TF fiction? Or rather, what would be objectionable about it? Geewunling 14:31, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

What, exactly, is the point of this page and the proposed bigger page? "These things are popular so they get referenced in this franchise"? Or, in Old Lady Job Justification Hearing parlance, "How does this help?". --M Sipher 14:55, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

FWIW, from the examples above, I think Shakespeare fits the bill best. G1 Galvatron, BW Megatron and Dinobot, RID Skybyte, G1 Megatron and Angry Archer all quote or paraphrase him - yet since he's never mentioned by name, he lives in "Items of note" or "Real World References". It's notable that there's a reference, but until someone says "Shakespeare" in a Transformers universe somewhere, or there's a screengrab or comic panel of a character holding a book with his name on it - like with Verity and Tennyson in Wreckers - he shouldn't get a page. For all we know, in the TF universe there's a Shakespearebot on Cybertron who wrote all the plays, like the Klingons did in Star Trek ;) I think we should treat Futurama the same way - pages like the Omacronians should have a note linking to the Wikipedia page, but until someone in an IDW comic says "I was up all night watching Futurama re-runs" then it doesn't get a page.

For one thing, the opening paragragh is written out-of-universe, which sits uneasily with me. I'd rather we waited until it reads something like: "Futurama is a TV show that Fat Geoff the Barman likes to watch. Fiction: At the Smokey Grey Old Tavern in Resurrection Valley, Texas, Fat Geoff told his buddy how much he was enjoying the re-runs of Futurama lately, and how Bender was his favourite because he loved robots. Seconds later, when Fortress Maximus and Flywheels smashed through the wall of his bar, he realised he didn't like robots quite so much." and then in the Notes below, we say "Futurama is of course the highly successful show..." --Emvee 16:15, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

We got Inhumanoids, G.I. Joe and Brave as franchise pages that do not attempt to be in-continuity with anything TF canon, but highlight the relationship between the two franchises. That was what I was going for with this page, though more minimally.

I find the idea of having to wait making a page that has, apparently, every right to be made except for a name check to be... well, isn't that what we have the nameless templates for? So we can have a page on a subject without a(n official) name? And since there is no funny description to make a principle-joke title out of, like fire snorting lizard, the actual name is the best choice after.

The way this page and the proposed page helps and could help is that, as can be seen from most above, people would be okay with this page (if perhaps formatted differently) if only Futurama had been name checked. Ergo, the page is "helpful" (as much as any other page is), but there's only a tiny bureaucratic detail getting in the way that can be solved with a standard procedure for "nameless" things.

Another way this kind of page is helpful is that it lessens the links to wikipedia, thus stuff like page moves and content changes are better monitored and have less influence on the up to dateness of the tfwiki. Geewunling 17:48, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

The thing is, GIJoe, Visionairies, Inhumanoids and Brave share much more with Transformers than just a few easter eggs. Visionairies was the backup strip in Marvel UK's Transformers comic for a time, Inhumanoids was directly pointed out in Allspark Almanac in reference to both the G1 cartoon in Animated, and the Inhumanoids actually did something in Shattered Glass. Brave is a close cousin to Transformers that featured numerous retools of Transformers toys and further influenced Transformers. GIJoe regularly crosses over with Transformers. All Futurama has are a few easter eggs that do not reference the franchise or its characters directly. --Detour 17:56, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

We've been very lenient with this article. I vote for deletion. --Thylacine 2000 22:06, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

Archive

I suggest that, if the page gets deleted, which the community is leaning towards, this talk gets ported over to the community portal. It addresses larger issues than just the fate of this page.--Jimsorenson 22:32, 12 August 2011 (EDT)