Talk:Combatant - Revision history

Fritz: /* Delete and fold back into protoform */

2021-06-24T18:56:31Z

Delete and fold back into protoform

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:56, 24 June 2021
Line 18:		Line 18:
	:::ROTF also makes a clear connection between the [[hatchling]]s, which are literally just unborn protoforms, and the grown-up protoform army, as Starscream explicitly states the former were created to become the latter. So there is an actual link between the two interpretations of the concept. And now that I'm thinking about it, shouldn't we merge the hatchling and protoform pages, seeing as how they're ''literally the same thing'' as opposed to just "similar but unrelated" like the Combatants? --[[User:Fritz\|Fritz]] ([[User talk:Fritz\|talk]]) 14:23, 24 June 2021 (EDT)		:::ROTF also makes a clear connection between the [[hatchling]]s, which are literally just unborn protoforms, and the grown-up protoform army, as Starscream explicitly states the former were created to become the latter. So there is an actual link between the two interpretations of the concept. And now that I'm thinking about it, shouldn't we merge the hatchling and protoform pages, seeing as how they're ''literally the same thing'' as opposed to just "similar but unrelated" like the Combatants? --[[User:Fritz\|Fritz]] ([[User talk:Fritz\|talk]]) 14:23, 24 June 2021 (EDT)
	:::::Hmm, that's a good point. On the one hand, we could keep them seperate, by virtue of them being essentially unique to the live-action film universe and that they are treated as a distinct stage in Cybertronian biology and have a specific term. But on the other hand...they are literally a kind of protoform, and if we merged them we could clarify in its section that in the live-action family 'hatchling' refers to something closer to the BW/Animated idea of a protoform (newborn Cybertronian), while 'protoform' refers to a Cybertronain's "default state"/generic like Combatants. But we should move this conversation to that page, unless there's still debate on if this page should be merged too? [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 14:46, 24 June 2021 (EDT)		:::::Hmm, that's a good point. On the one hand, we could keep them seperate, by virtue of them being essentially unique to the live-action film universe and that they are treated as a distinct stage in Cybertronian biology and have a specific term. But on the other hand...they are literally a kind of protoform, and if we merged them we could clarify in its section that in the live-action family 'hatchling' refers to something closer to the BW/Animated idea of a protoform (newborn Cybertronian), while 'protoform' refers to a Cybertronain's "default state"/generic like Combatants. But we should move this conversation to that page, unless there's still debate on if this page should be merged too? [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 14:46, 24 June 2021 (EDT)
			::::::I think we're done with the Combatants here. I'll start a new discussion on the Hatchling page then. --[[User:Fritz\|Fritz]] ([[User talk:Fritz\|talk]]) 14:56, 24 June 2021 (EDT)

TransFormersfan1: Merging

2021-06-24T18:46:09Z

Merging

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:46, 24 June 2021
Line 17:		Line 17:
	::I tihnk it's less that they're two different things and more that what a protoform ''is'' in the wider context has changed. Kind of like sparks, where they were introduced in the Beast Era, but have been slowly integrated into pretty much every continuity since as a standard aspect of Cybertronain biology. If we're being honest, there is now plenty of BW tie-in media that has existing characters reset as protoforms (Grimlock arguably goes all the way back to the original toyline, not to mention all the IDW stuff with pre-Earth Tigatron and Airazor), so the idea that protoforms have never been characters before has been slowly retconned out of BW itself. I think part of why I was so dead set on keeping them merged was because to me Combatants seemed like this really clear conceptual throughline between BW protoforms and 2007 movie protoforms, and I tend to take a bigger picture look at things, like "how did this concept get to what it is now?" I'm sorry if I came off rudely, Saix, no hard feelings? [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 11:14, 24 June 2021 (EDT)		::I tihnk it's less that they're two different things and more that what a protoform ''is'' in the wider context has changed. Kind of like sparks, where they were introduced in the Beast Era, but have been slowly integrated into pretty much every continuity since as a standard aspect of Cybertronain biology. If we're being honest, there is now plenty of BW tie-in media that has existing characters reset as protoforms (Grimlock arguably goes all the way back to the original toyline, not to mention all the IDW stuff with pre-Earth Tigatron and Airazor), so the idea that protoforms have never been characters before has been slowly retconned out of BW itself. I think part of why I was so dead set on keeping them merged was because to me Combatants seemed like this really clear conceptual throughline between BW protoforms and 2007 movie protoforms, and I tend to take a bigger picture look at things, like "how did this concept get to what it is now?" I'm sorry if I came off rudely, Saix, no hard feelings? [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 11:14, 24 June 2021 (EDT)
	:::ROTF also makes a clear connection between the [[hatchling]]s, which are literally just unborn protoforms, and the grown-up protoform army, as Starscream explicitly states the former were created to become the latter. So there is an actual link between the two interpretations of the concept. And now that I'm thinking about it, shouldn't we merge the hatchling and protoform pages, seeing as how they're ''literally the same thing'' as opposed to just "similar but unrelated" like the Combatants? --[[User:Fritz\|Fritz]] ([[User talk:Fritz\|talk]]) 14:23, 24 June 2021 (EDT)		:::ROTF also makes a clear connection between the [[hatchling]]s, which are literally just unborn protoforms, and the grown-up protoform army, as Starscream explicitly states the former were created to become the latter. So there is an actual link between the two interpretations of the concept. And now that I'm thinking about it, shouldn't we merge the hatchling and protoform pages, seeing as how they're ''literally the same thing'' as opposed to just "similar but unrelated" like the Combatants? --[[User:Fritz\|Fritz]] ([[User talk:Fritz\|talk]]) 14:23, 24 June 2021 (EDT)
			:::::Hmm, that's a good point. On the one hand, we could keep them seperate, by virtue of them being essentially unique to the live-action film universe and that they are treated as a distinct stage in Cybertronian biology and have a specific term. But on the other hand...they are literally a kind of protoform, and if we merged them we could clarify in its section that in the live-action family 'hatchling' refers to something closer to the BW/Animated idea of a protoform (newborn Cybertronian), while 'protoform' refers to a Cybertronain's "default state"/generic like Combatants. But we should move this conversation to that page, unless there's still debate on if this page should be merged too? [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 14:46, 24 June 2021 (EDT)

Fritz: /* Delete and fold back into protoform */

2021-06-24T18:23:03Z

Delete and fold back into protoform

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:23, 24 June 2021
Line 16:		Line 16:
	I think part of the problem is that the Protoform page folds together two different concepts just because they have the same name. There's the "body waiting for life" that we see in Beast Wars, Animated, and Prime, and then there's the "fully grown transformer with no alt-mode kibble" transitional form we see in the movie, and they're treated as if they're the same thing. Certainly the latter are more similar to Combatants (not the same thing, but given RotF and DotM had a lot of generic con protoforms being used like sentai mooks, a "see also" would make sense) than they are to babies.[[User:Tindalos\|Tindalos]] ([[User talk:Tindalos\|talk]]) 01:26, 24 June 2021 (EDT)		I think part of the problem is that the Protoform page folds together two different concepts just because they have the same name. There's the "body waiting for life" that we see in Beast Wars, Animated, and Prime, and then there's the "fully grown transformer with no alt-mode kibble" transitional form we see in the movie, and they're treated as if they're the same thing. Certainly the latter are more similar to Combatants (not the same thing, but given RotF and DotM had a lot of generic con protoforms being used like sentai mooks, a "see also" would make sense) than they are to babies.[[User:Tindalos\|Tindalos]] ([[User talk:Tindalos\|talk]]) 01:26, 24 June 2021 (EDT)
	::I tihnk it's less that they're two different things and more that what a protoform ''is'' in the wider context has changed. Kind of like sparks, where they were introduced in the Beast Era, but have been slowly integrated into pretty much every continuity since as a standard aspect of Cybertronain biology. If we're being honest, there is now plenty of BW tie-in media that has existing characters reset as protoforms (Grimlock arguably goes all the way back to the original toyline, not to mention all the IDW stuff with pre-Earth Tigatron and Airazor), so the idea that protoforms have never been characters before has been slowly retconned out of BW itself. I think part of why I was so dead set on keeping them merged was because to me Combatants seemed like this really clear conceptual throughline between BW protoforms and 2007 movie protoforms, and I tend to take a bigger picture look at things, like "how did this concept get to what it is now?" I'm sorry if I came off rudely, Saix, no hard feelings? [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 11:14, 24 June 2021 (EDT)		::I tihnk it's less that they're two different things and more that what a protoform ''is'' in the wider context has changed. Kind of like sparks, where they were introduced in the Beast Era, but have been slowly integrated into pretty much every continuity since as a standard aspect of Cybertronain biology. If we're being honest, there is now plenty of BW tie-in media that has existing characters reset as protoforms (Grimlock arguably goes all the way back to the original toyline, not to mention all the IDW stuff with pre-Earth Tigatron and Airazor), so the idea that protoforms have never been characters before has been slowly retconned out of BW itself. I think part of why I was so dead set on keeping them merged was because to me Combatants seemed like this really clear conceptual throughline between BW protoforms and 2007 movie protoforms, and I tend to take a bigger picture look at things, like "how did this concept get to what it is now?" I'm sorry if I came off rudely, Saix, no hard feelings? [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 11:14, 24 June 2021 (EDT)
			:::ROTF also makes a clear connection between the [[hatchling]]s, which are literally just unborn protoforms, and the grown-up protoform army, as Starscream explicitly states the former were created to become the latter. So there is an actual link between the two interpretations of the concept. And now that I'm thinking about it, shouldn't we merge the hatchling and protoform pages, seeing as how they're ''literally the same thing'' as opposed to just "similar but unrelated" like the Combatants? --[[User:Fritz\|Fritz]] ([[User talk:Fritz\|talk]]) 14:23, 24 June 2021 (EDT)

TransFormersfan1: /* Delete and fold back into protoform */

2021-06-24T15:14:35Z

Delete and fold back into protoform

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:14, 24 June 2021
Line 15:		Line 15:
	:::Fixed. I still think we should merge them, but it seems I'm alone in that, so hopefully the notes should make things more accessible. [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 15:53, 23 June 2021 (EDT)		:::Fixed. I still think we should merge them, but it seems I'm alone in that, so hopefully the notes should make things more accessible. [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 15:53, 23 June 2021 (EDT)
	I think part of the problem is that the Protoform page folds together two different concepts just because they have the same name. There's the "body waiting for life" that we see in Beast Wars, Animated, and Prime, and then there's the "fully grown transformer with no alt-mode kibble" transitional form we see in the movie, and they're treated as if they're the same thing. Certainly the latter are more similar to Combatants (not the same thing, but given RotF and DotM had a lot of generic con protoforms being used like sentai mooks, a "see also" would make sense) than they are to babies.[[User:Tindalos\|Tindalos]] ([[User talk:Tindalos\|talk]]) 01:26, 24 June 2021 (EDT)		I think part of the problem is that the Protoform page folds together two different concepts just because they have the same name. There's the "body waiting for life" that we see in Beast Wars, Animated, and Prime, and then there's the "fully grown transformer with no alt-mode kibble" transitional form we see in the movie, and they're treated as if they're the same thing. Certainly the latter are more similar to Combatants (not the same thing, but given RotF and DotM had a lot of generic con protoforms being used like sentai mooks, a "see also" would make sense) than they are to babies.[[User:Tindalos\|Tindalos]] ([[User talk:Tindalos\|talk]]) 01:26, 24 June 2021 (EDT)
			::I tihnk it's less that they're two different things and more that what a protoform ''is'' in the wider context has changed. Kind of like sparks, where they were introduced in the Beast Era, but have been slowly integrated into pretty much every continuity since as a standard aspect of Cybertronain biology. If we're being honest, there is now plenty of BW tie-in media that has existing characters reset as protoforms (Grimlock arguably goes all the way back to the original toyline, not to mention all the IDW stuff with pre-Earth Tigatron and Airazor), so the idea that protoforms have never been characters before has been slowly retconned out of BW itself. I think part of why I was so dead set on keeping them merged was because to me Combatants seemed like this really clear conceptual throughline between BW protoforms and 2007 movie protoforms, and I tend to take a bigger picture look at things, like "how did this concept get to what it is now?" I'm sorry if I came off rudely, Saix, no hard feelings? [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 11:14, 24 June 2021 (EDT)

Tindalos at 05:26, 24 June 2021

2021-06-24T05:26:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:26, 24 June 2021
Line 14:		Line 14:
	::Note that the [[Living metal]] article still regards these guys as protoforms. That ought to be rewritten or taken out. --[[User:Sabrblade\|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade\|talk]]) 15:15, 23 June 2021 (EDT)		::Note that the [[Living metal]] article still regards these guys as protoforms. That ought to be rewritten or taken out. --[[User:Sabrblade\|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade\|talk]]) 15:15, 23 June 2021 (EDT)
	:::Fixed. I still think we should merge them, but it seems I'm alone in that, so hopefully the notes should make things more accessible. [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 15:53, 23 June 2021 (EDT)		:::Fixed. I still think we should merge them, but it seems I'm alone in that, so hopefully the notes should make things more accessible. [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 15:53, 23 June 2021 (EDT)
			I think part of the problem is that the Protoform page folds together two different concepts just because they have the same name. There's the "body waiting for life" that we see in Beast Wars, Animated, and Prime, and then there's the "fully grown transformer with no alt-mode kibble" transitional form we see in the movie, and they're treated as if they're the same thing. Certainly the latter are more similar to Combatants (not the same thing, but given RotF and DotM had a lot of generic con protoforms being used like sentai mooks, a "see also" would make sense) than they are to babies.[[User:Tindalos\|Tindalos]] ([[User talk:Tindalos\|talk]]) 01:26, 24 June 2021 (EDT)

TransFormersfan1: /* Delete and fold back into protoform */

2021-06-23T19:53:35Z

Delete and fold back into protoform

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:53, 23 June 2021
Line 13:		Line 13:
	:Alright, I've added notes on both respective pages just to clarify the misconception. I think we can agree with how long they were listed as protoforms on this wiki (and the original image ''is'' still called protoform), it's useful to make a note of it.[[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 15:08, 23 June 2021 (EDT)		:Alright, I've added notes on both respective pages just to clarify the misconception. I think we can agree with how long they were listed as protoforms on this wiki (and the original image ''is'' still called protoform), it's useful to make a note of it.[[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 15:08, 23 June 2021 (EDT)
	::Note that the [[Living metal]] article still regards these guys as protoforms. That ought to be rewritten or taken out. --[[User:Sabrblade\|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade\|talk]]) 15:15, 23 June 2021 (EDT)		::Note that the [[Living metal]] article still regards these guys as protoforms. That ought to be rewritten or taken out. --[[User:Sabrblade\|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade\|talk]]) 15:15, 23 June 2021 (EDT)
			:::Fixed. I still think we should merge them, but it seems I'm alone in that, so hopefully the notes should make things more accessible. [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 15:53, 23 June 2021 (EDT)

Sabrblade: /* Delete and fold back into protoform */

2021-06-23T19:15:54Z

Delete and fold back into protoform

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:15, 23 June 2021
Line 12:		Line 12:
	As much as I do believe that the Combatants were inspired by protoforms, I'm fully aware that there's no place for speculation here, and so I have no more arguments in favor of folding back. However, I still think that we should at least add a note on both pages pointing their similarities, just like the Angolmois Energy and Dark Energon pages have. --[[User:Fritz\|Fritz]] ([[User talk:Fritz\|talk]]) 13:52, 23 June 2021 (EDT)		As much as I do believe that the Combatants were inspired by protoforms, I'm fully aware that there's no place for speculation here, and so I have no more arguments in favor of folding back. However, I still think that we should at least add a note on both pages pointing their similarities, just like the Angolmois Energy and Dark Energon pages have. --[[User:Fritz\|Fritz]] ([[User talk:Fritz\|talk]]) 13:52, 23 June 2021 (EDT)
	:Alright, I've added notes on both respective pages just to clarify the misconception. I think we can agree with how long they were listed as protoforms on this wiki (and the original image ''is'' still called protoform), it's useful to make a note of it.[[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 15:08, 23 June 2021 (EDT)		:Alright, I've added notes on both respective pages just to clarify the misconception. I think we can agree with how long they were listed as protoforms on this wiki (and the original image ''is'' still called protoform), it's useful to make a note of it.[[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 15:08, 23 June 2021 (EDT)
			::Note that the [[Living metal]] article still regards these guys as protoforms. That ought to be rewritten or taken out. --[[User:Sabrblade\|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade\|talk]]) 15:15, 23 June 2021 (EDT)

TransFormersfan1: /* Delete and fold back into protoform */

2021-06-23T19:08:16Z

Delete and fold back into protoform

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:08, 23 June 2021
Line 11:		Line 11:
	::::::I'm going to step back and let some other people weigh in, because this is getting us nowhere. I'll go with whatever the majority and admins decide. [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 12:43, 23 June 2021 (EDT)		::::::I'm going to step back and let some other people weigh in, because this is getting us nowhere. I'll go with whatever the majority and admins decide. [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 12:43, 23 June 2021 (EDT)
	As much as I do believe that the Combatants were inspired by protoforms, I'm fully aware that there's no place for speculation here, and so I have no more arguments in favor of folding back. However, I still think that we should at least add a note on both pages pointing their similarities, just like the Angolmois Energy and Dark Energon pages have. --[[User:Fritz\|Fritz]] ([[User talk:Fritz\|talk]]) 13:52, 23 June 2021 (EDT)		As much as I do believe that the Combatants were inspired by protoforms, I'm fully aware that there's no place for speculation here, and so I have no more arguments in favor of folding back. However, I still think that we should at least add a note on both pages pointing their similarities, just like the Angolmois Energy and Dark Energon pages have. --[[User:Fritz\|Fritz]] ([[User talk:Fritz\|talk]]) 13:52, 23 June 2021 (EDT)
			:Alright, I've added notes on both respective pages just to clarify the misconception. I think we can agree with how long they were listed as protoforms on this wiki (and the original image ''is'' still called protoform), it's useful to make a note of it.[[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 15:08, 23 June 2021 (EDT)

Fritz: /* Delete and fold back into protoform */

2021-06-23T17:52:17Z

Delete and fold back into protoform

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:52, 23 June 2021
Line 10:		Line 10:
	:::::"This thing I say is similar to this other thing established a decade later" isn't how most of the wiki works. There is no direct connection between Movieverse protoforms and Combantants, be it inspiration or fictional linkage, like how there's no direct connection between [[Angolmois Energy]] and [[Dark Energon]] beyond vague similarity (and ''thank God'' they weren't merged because subsequent actual fiction would firmly establish they aren't actually the same thing). [[User:Saix\|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix\|talk]]) 12:22, 23 June 2021 (EDT)		:::::"This thing I say is similar to this other thing established a decade later" isn't how most of the wiki works. There is no direct connection between Movieverse protoforms and Combantants, be it inspiration or fictional linkage, like how there's no direct connection between [[Angolmois Energy]] and [[Dark Energon]] beyond vague similarity (and ''thank God'' they weren't merged because subsequent actual fiction would firmly establish they aren't actually the same thing). [[User:Saix\|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix\|talk]]) 12:22, 23 June 2021 (EDT)
	::::::I'm going to step back and let some other people weigh in, because this is getting us nowhere. I'll go with whatever the majority and admins decide. [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 12:43, 23 June 2021 (EDT)		::::::I'm going to step back and let some other people weigh in, because this is getting us nowhere. I'll go with whatever the majority and admins decide. [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 12:43, 23 June 2021 (EDT)
			As much as I do believe that the Combatants were inspired by protoforms, I'm fully aware that there's no place for speculation here, and so I have no more arguments in favor of folding back. However, I still think that we should at least add a note on both pages pointing their similarities, just like the Angolmois Energy and Dark Energon pages have. --[[User:Fritz\|Fritz]] ([[User talk:Fritz\|talk]]) 13:52, 23 June 2021 (EDT)

TransFormersfan1: /* Delete and fold back into protoform */

2021-06-23T16:43:32Z

Delete and fold back into protoform

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:43, 23 June 2021
Line 9:		Line 9:
	::::Everyone else who's talked on this page agrees, so what do we need for a proper consensus here? I'd also like to note that you unilaterally pulled this content from the page it's been on for years because it was given an extra name in a sourcebook. [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 12:05, 23 June 2021 (EDT)		::::Everyone else who's talked on this page agrees, so what do we need for a proper consensus here? I'd also like to note that you unilaterally pulled this content from the page it's been on for years because it was given an extra name in a sourcebook. [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 12:05, 23 June 2021 (EDT)
	:::::"This thing I say is similar to this other thing established a decade later" isn't how most of the wiki works. There is no direct connection between Movieverse protoforms and Combantants, be it inspiration or fictional linkage, like how there's no direct connection between [[Angolmois Energy]] and [[Dark Energon]] beyond vague similarity (and ''thank God'' they weren't merged because subsequent actual fiction would firmly establish they aren't actually the same thing). [[User:Saix\|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix\|talk]]) 12:22, 23 June 2021 (EDT)		:::::"This thing I say is similar to this other thing established a decade later" isn't how most of the wiki works. There is no direct connection between Movieverse protoforms and Combantants, be it inspiration or fictional linkage, like how there's no direct connection between [[Angolmois Energy]] and [[Dark Energon]] beyond vague similarity (and ''thank God'' they weren't merged because subsequent actual fiction would firmly establish they aren't actually the same thing). [[User:Saix\|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix\|talk]]) 12:22, 23 June 2021 (EDT)
			::::::I'm going to step back and let some other people weigh in, because this is getting us nowhere. I'll go with whatever the majority and admins decide. [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 12:43, 23 June 2021 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:56, 24 June 2021
Line 18:		Line 18:
	:::ROTF also makes a clear connection between the [[hatchling]]s, which are literally just unborn protoforms, and the grown-up protoform army, as Starscream explicitly states the former were created to become the latter. So there is an actual link between the two interpretations of the concept. And now that I'm thinking about it, shouldn't we merge the hatchling and protoform pages, seeing as how they're ''literally the same thing'' as opposed to just "similar but unrelated" like the Combatants? --[[User:Fritz\|Fritz]] ([[User talk:Fritz\|talk]]) 14:23, 24 June 2021 (EDT)		:::ROTF also makes a clear connection between the [[hatchling]]s, which are literally just unborn protoforms, and the grown-up protoform army, as Starscream explicitly states the former were created to become the latter. So there is an actual link between the two interpretations of the concept. And now that I'm thinking about it, shouldn't we merge the hatchling and protoform pages, seeing as how they're ''literally the same thing'' as opposed to just "similar but unrelated" like the Combatants? --[[User:Fritz\|Fritz]] ([[User talk:Fritz\|talk]]) 14:23, 24 June 2021 (EDT)
	:::::Hmm, that's a good point. On the one hand, we could keep them seperate, by virtue of them being essentially unique to the live-action film universe and that they are treated as a distinct stage in Cybertronian biology and have a specific term. But on the other hand...they are literally a kind of protoform, and if we merged them we could clarify in its section that in the live-action family 'hatchling' refers to something closer to the BW/Animated idea of a protoform (newborn Cybertronian), while 'protoform' refers to a Cybertronain's "default state"/generic like Combatants. But we should move this conversation to that page, unless there's still debate on if this page should be merged too? [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 14:46, 24 June 2021 (EDT)		:::::Hmm, that's a good point. On the one hand, we could keep them seperate, by virtue of them being essentially unique to the live-action film universe and that they are treated as a distinct stage in Cybertronian biology and have a specific term. But on the other hand...they are literally a kind of protoform, and if we merged them we could clarify in its section that in the live-action family 'hatchling' refers to something closer to the BW/Animated idea of a protoform (newborn Cybertronian), while 'protoform' refers to a Cybertronain's "default state"/generic like Combatants. But we should move this conversation to that page, unless there's still debate on if this page should be merged too? [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 14:46, 24 June 2021 (EDT)
			::::::I think we're done with the Combatants here. I'll start a new discussion on the Hatchling page then. --[[User:Fritz\|Fritz]] ([[User talk:Fritz\|talk]]) 14:56, 24 June 2021 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:46, 24 June 2021
Line 17:		Line 17:
	::I tihnk it's less that they're two different things and more that what a protoform ''is'' in the wider context has changed. Kind of like sparks, where they were introduced in the Beast Era, but have been slowly integrated into pretty much every continuity since as a standard aspect of Cybertronain biology. If we're being honest, there is now plenty of BW tie-in media that has existing characters reset as protoforms (Grimlock arguably goes all the way back to the original toyline, not to mention all the IDW stuff with pre-Earth Tigatron and Airazor), so the idea that protoforms have never been characters before has been slowly retconned out of BW itself. I think part of why I was so dead set on keeping them merged was because to me Combatants seemed like this really clear conceptual throughline between BW protoforms and 2007 movie protoforms, and I tend to take a bigger picture look at things, like "how did this concept get to what it is now?" I'm sorry if I came off rudely, Saix, no hard feelings? [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 11:14, 24 June 2021 (EDT)		::I tihnk it's less that they're two different things and more that what a protoform ''is'' in the wider context has changed. Kind of like sparks, where they were introduced in the Beast Era, but have been slowly integrated into pretty much every continuity since as a standard aspect of Cybertronain biology. If we're being honest, there is now plenty of BW tie-in media that has existing characters reset as protoforms (Grimlock arguably goes all the way back to the original toyline, not to mention all the IDW stuff with pre-Earth Tigatron and Airazor), so the idea that protoforms have never been characters before has been slowly retconned out of BW itself. I think part of why I was so dead set on keeping them merged was because to me Combatants seemed like this really clear conceptual throughline between BW protoforms and 2007 movie protoforms, and I tend to take a bigger picture look at things, like "how did this concept get to what it is now?" I'm sorry if I came off rudely, Saix, no hard feelings? [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 11:14, 24 June 2021 (EDT)
	:::ROTF also makes a clear connection between the [[hatchling]]s, which are literally just unborn protoforms, and the grown-up protoform army, as Starscream explicitly states the former were created to become the latter. So there is an actual link between the two interpretations of the concept. And now that I'm thinking about it, shouldn't we merge the hatchling and protoform pages, seeing as how they're ''literally the same thing'' as opposed to just "similar but unrelated" like the Combatants? --[[User:Fritz\|Fritz]] ([[User talk:Fritz\|talk]]) 14:23, 24 June 2021 (EDT)		:::ROTF also makes a clear connection between the [[hatchling]]s, which are literally just unborn protoforms, and the grown-up protoform army, as Starscream explicitly states the former were created to become the latter. So there is an actual link between the two interpretations of the concept. And now that I'm thinking about it, shouldn't we merge the hatchling and protoform pages, seeing as how they're ''literally the same thing'' as opposed to just "similar but unrelated" like the Combatants? --[[User:Fritz\|Fritz]] ([[User talk:Fritz\|talk]]) 14:23, 24 June 2021 (EDT)
			:::::Hmm, that's a good point. On the one hand, we could keep them seperate, by virtue of them being essentially unique to the live-action film universe and that they are treated as a distinct stage in Cybertronian biology and have a specific term. But on the other hand...they are literally a kind of protoform, and if we merged them we could clarify in its section that in the live-action family 'hatchling' refers to something closer to the BW/Animated idea of a protoform (newborn Cybertronian), while 'protoform' refers to a Cybertronain's "default state"/generic like Combatants. But we should move this conversation to that page, unless there's still debate on if this page should be merged too? [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 14:46, 24 June 2021 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:23, 24 June 2021
Line 16:		Line 16:
	I think part of the problem is that the Protoform page folds together two different concepts just because they have the same name. There's the "body waiting for life" that we see in Beast Wars, Animated, and Prime, and then there's the "fully grown transformer with no alt-mode kibble" transitional form we see in the movie, and they're treated as if they're the same thing. Certainly the latter are more similar to Combatants (not the same thing, but given RotF and DotM had a lot of generic con protoforms being used like sentai mooks, a "see also" would make sense) than they are to babies.[[User:Tindalos\|Tindalos]] ([[User talk:Tindalos\|talk]]) 01:26, 24 June 2021 (EDT)		I think part of the problem is that the Protoform page folds together two different concepts just because they have the same name. There's the "body waiting for life" that we see in Beast Wars, Animated, and Prime, and then there's the "fully grown transformer with no alt-mode kibble" transitional form we see in the movie, and they're treated as if they're the same thing. Certainly the latter are more similar to Combatants (not the same thing, but given RotF and DotM had a lot of generic con protoforms being used like sentai mooks, a "see also" would make sense) than they are to babies.[[User:Tindalos\|Tindalos]] ([[User talk:Tindalos\|talk]]) 01:26, 24 June 2021 (EDT)
	::I tihnk it's less that they're two different things and more that what a protoform ''is'' in the wider context has changed. Kind of like sparks, where they were introduced in the Beast Era, but have been slowly integrated into pretty much every continuity since as a standard aspect of Cybertronain biology. If we're being honest, there is now plenty of BW tie-in media that has existing characters reset as protoforms (Grimlock arguably goes all the way back to the original toyline, not to mention all the IDW stuff with pre-Earth Tigatron and Airazor), so the idea that protoforms have never been characters before has been slowly retconned out of BW itself. I think part of why I was so dead set on keeping them merged was because to me Combatants seemed like this really clear conceptual throughline between BW protoforms and 2007 movie protoforms, and I tend to take a bigger picture look at things, like "how did this concept get to what it is now?" I'm sorry if I came off rudely, Saix, no hard feelings? [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 11:14, 24 June 2021 (EDT)		::I tihnk it's less that they're two different things and more that what a protoform ''is'' in the wider context has changed. Kind of like sparks, where they were introduced in the Beast Era, but have been slowly integrated into pretty much every continuity since as a standard aspect of Cybertronain biology. If we're being honest, there is now plenty of BW tie-in media that has existing characters reset as protoforms (Grimlock arguably goes all the way back to the original toyline, not to mention all the IDW stuff with pre-Earth Tigatron and Airazor), so the idea that protoforms have never been characters before has been slowly retconned out of BW itself. I think part of why I was so dead set on keeping them merged was because to me Combatants seemed like this really clear conceptual throughline between BW protoforms and 2007 movie protoforms, and I tend to take a bigger picture look at things, like "how did this concept get to what it is now?" I'm sorry if I came off rudely, Saix, no hard feelings? [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 11:14, 24 June 2021 (EDT)
			:::ROTF also makes a clear connection between the [[hatchling]]s, which are literally just unborn protoforms, and the grown-up protoform army, as Starscream explicitly states the former were created to become the latter. So there is an actual link between the two interpretations of the concept. And now that I'm thinking about it, shouldn't we merge the hatchling and protoform pages, seeing as how they're ''literally the same thing'' as opposed to just "similar but unrelated" like the Combatants? --[[User:Fritz\|Fritz]] ([[User talk:Fritz\|talk]]) 14:23, 24 June 2021 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:14, 24 June 2021
Line 15:		Line 15:
	:::Fixed. I still think we should merge them, but it seems I'm alone in that, so hopefully the notes should make things more accessible. [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 15:53, 23 June 2021 (EDT)		:::Fixed. I still think we should merge them, but it seems I'm alone in that, so hopefully the notes should make things more accessible. [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 15:53, 23 June 2021 (EDT)
	I think part of the problem is that the Protoform page folds together two different concepts just because they have the same name. There's the "body waiting for life" that we see in Beast Wars, Animated, and Prime, and then there's the "fully grown transformer with no alt-mode kibble" transitional form we see in the movie, and they're treated as if they're the same thing. Certainly the latter are more similar to Combatants (not the same thing, but given RotF and DotM had a lot of generic con protoforms being used like sentai mooks, a "see also" would make sense) than they are to babies.[[User:Tindalos\|Tindalos]] ([[User talk:Tindalos\|talk]]) 01:26, 24 June 2021 (EDT)		I think part of the problem is that the Protoform page folds together two different concepts just because they have the same name. There's the "body waiting for life" that we see in Beast Wars, Animated, and Prime, and then there's the "fully grown transformer with no alt-mode kibble" transitional form we see in the movie, and they're treated as if they're the same thing. Certainly the latter are more similar to Combatants (not the same thing, but given RotF and DotM had a lot of generic con protoforms being used like sentai mooks, a "see also" would make sense) than they are to babies.[[User:Tindalos\|Tindalos]] ([[User talk:Tindalos\|talk]]) 01:26, 24 June 2021 (EDT)
			::I tihnk it's less that they're two different things and more that what a protoform ''is'' in the wider context has changed. Kind of like sparks, where they were introduced in the Beast Era, but have been slowly integrated into pretty much every continuity since as a standard aspect of Cybertronain biology. If we're being honest, there is now plenty of BW tie-in media that has existing characters reset as protoforms (Grimlock arguably goes all the way back to the original toyline, not to mention all the IDW stuff with pre-Earth Tigatron and Airazor), so the idea that protoforms have never been characters before has been slowly retconned out of BW itself. I think part of why I was so dead set on keeping them merged was because to me Combatants seemed like this really clear conceptual throughline between BW protoforms and 2007 movie protoforms, and I tend to take a bigger picture look at things, like "how did this concept get to what it is now?" I'm sorry if I came off rudely, Saix, no hard feelings? [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 11:14, 24 June 2021 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:26, 24 June 2021
Line 14:		Line 14:
	::Note that the [[Living metal]] article still regards these guys as protoforms. That ought to be rewritten or taken out. --[[User:Sabrblade\|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade\|talk]]) 15:15, 23 June 2021 (EDT)		::Note that the [[Living metal]] article still regards these guys as protoforms. That ought to be rewritten or taken out. --[[User:Sabrblade\|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade\|talk]]) 15:15, 23 June 2021 (EDT)
	:::Fixed. I still think we should merge them, but it seems I'm alone in that, so hopefully the notes should make things more accessible. [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 15:53, 23 June 2021 (EDT)		:::Fixed. I still think we should merge them, but it seems I'm alone in that, so hopefully the notes should make things more accessible. [[User:TransFormersfan1\|TransFormersfan1]] ([[User talk:TransFormersfan1\|talk]]) 15:53, 23 June 2021 (EDT)
			I think part of the problem is that the Protoform page folds together two different concepts just because they have the same name. There's the "body waiting for life" that we see in Beast Wars, Animated, and Prime, and then there's the "fully grown transformer with no alt-mode kibble" transitional form we see in the movie, and they're treated as if they're the same thing. Certainly the latter are more similar to Combatants (not the same thing, but given RotF and DotM had a lot of generic con protoforms being used like sentai mooks, a "see also" would make sense) than they are to babies.[[User:Tindalos\|Tindalos]] ([[User talk:Tindalos\|talk]]) 01:26, 24 June 2021 (EDT)