Talk:Guardian Spirit - Revision history

Daytonjhammon: Added Delete template. The original page for this "talk page" has been deleted since 2011?

2025-02-18T05:31:55Z

Added Delete template. The original page for this "talk page" has been deleted since 2011?

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:31, 18 February 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{delete\|The page it's supposed to be a talk page for has been deleted since 2011?}}
	[[Image:Muk97-guardianspirit.jpg\|right\|thumb\|300px\|]]		[[Image:Muk97-guardianspirit.jpg\|right\|thumb\|300px\|]]
	Pardon my irritation, but what, exactly, of this article was bullshit?		Pardon my irritation, but what, exactly, of this article was bullshit?

Derik at 19:58, 8 February 2011

2011-02-08T19:58:07Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:58, 8 February 2011
Line 16:		Line 16:
	:::::The religion page would be fine. It ought be documented, but I don't think it necessarily ''needs'' its own article-- a note on another one is fine. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 00:30, 7 February 2011 (EST)		:::::The religion page would be fine. It ought be documented, but I don't think it necessarily ''needs'' its own article-- a note on another one is fine. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 00:30, 7 February 2011 (EST)
	::::::I just realized the religion page isn't in the normal in-universe fiction section style. It's in an essay format that don't really want to mess with. It would be hard to stick in a comment that Optimus Prime had some vague belief in a non specific guardian spirit before believing in Primus. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 12:31, 7 February 2011 (EST)		::::::I just realized the religion page isn't in the normal in-universe fiction section style. It's in an essay format that don't really want to mess with. It would be hard to stick in a comment that Optimus Prime had some vague belief in a non specific guardian spirit before believing in Primus. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 12:31, 7 February 2011 (EST)
			:::::::What's that you say? The Religion Article is improperly formatted like a dead-tree edition, which makes it difficult to append and adjust like a proper wiki article should be? -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 14:58, 8 February 2011 (EST)

Starfield at 17:31, 7 February 2011

2011-02-07T17:31:29Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:31, 7 February 2011
Line 15:		Line 15:
	:::::Nah, if I was doozying it up Willis wouldn't waste time replying. More a case of "There's not much to say about it" and then proceeding to say it anyway.		:::::Nah, if I was doozying it up Willis wouldn't waste time replying. More a case of "There's not much to say about it" and then proceeding to say it anyway.
	:::::The religion page would be fine. It ought be documented, but I don't think it necessarily ''needs'' its own article-- a note on another one is fine. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 00:30, 7 February 2011 (EST)		:::::The religion page would be fine. It ought be documented, but I don't think it necessarily ''needs'' its own article-- a note on another one is fine. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 00:30, 7 February 2011 (EST)
			::::::I just realized the religion page isn't in the normal in-universe fiction section style. It's in an essay format that don't really want to mess with. It would be hard to stick in a comment that Optimus Prime had some vague belief in a non specific guardian spirit before believing in Primus. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 12:31, 7 February 2011 (EST)

Derik at 05:30, 7 February 2011

2011-02-07T05:30:37Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:30, 7 February 2011
Line 13:		Line 13:
	::: I'd prefer no article, because the "guardian spirit" term as-presented in the line of dialog suggests absolutely nothing that we should examine further. It's just a common noun. A turn of phrase. It is not referencing about some capital-G capital-S "Guardian Spirit". It is not something we should attempt to build an article from, and certainly not to the incredible detail you managed to extrapolate from it somehow. (I've inlined your uploaded panel into this talk page so that others can see what we're both talking about.) --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 23:27, 6 February 2011 (EST)		::: I'd prefer no article, because the "guardian spirit" term as-presented in the line of dialog suggests absolutely nothing that we should examine further. It's just a common noun. A turn of phrase. It is not referencing about some capital-G capital-S "Guardian Spirit". It is not something we should attempt to build an article from, and certainly not to the incredible detail you managed to extrapolate from it somehow. (I've inlined your uploaded panel into this talk page so that others can see what we're both talking about.) --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 23:27, 6 February 2011 (EST)
	::::It sounds like this article was a doozy. But Prime's comment should be commented on in the [[religion]] article. Prime was some kind of agnostic theist before the Autobots met up with Primus and believed the (bullcrap) story he told them. (We all know Transformers are really evolved from levers and pulleys. It said so in issue 1.) - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 00:03, 7 February 2011 (EST)		::::It sounds like this article was a doozy. But Prime's comment should be commented on in the [[religion]] article. Prime was some kind of agnostic theist before the Autobots met up with Primus and believed the (bullcrap) story he told them. (We all know Transformers are really evolved from levers and pulleys. It said so in issue 1.) - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 00:03, 7 February 2011 (EST)
			:::::Nah, if I was doozying it up Willis wouldn't waste time replying. More a case of "There's not much to say about it" and then proceeding to say it anyway.
			:::::The religion page would be fine. It ought be documented, but I don't think it necessarily ''needs'' its own article-- a note on another one is fine. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 00:30, 7 February 2011 (EST)

Starfield at 05:03, 7 February 2011

2011-02-07T05:03:13Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:03, 7 February 2011
Line 12:		Line 12:
	::Given my druthers, I'd probably move the examples-of-what-it's-not to a "see also" at the end, and basically re-render this as a 'type of superstition' article. Acceptable? -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 22:24, 6 February 2011 (EST)		::Given my druthers, I'd probably move the examples-of-what-it's-not to a "see also" at the end, and basically re-render this as a 'type of superstition' article. Acceptable? -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 22:24, 6 February 2011 (EST)
	::: I'd prefer no article, because the "guardian spirit" term as-presented in the line of dialog suggests absolutely nothing that we should examine further. It's just a common noun. A turn of phrase. It is not referencing about some capital-G capital-S "Guardian Spirit". It is not something we should attempt to build an article from, and certainly not to the incredible detail you managed to extrapolate from it somehow. (I've inlined your uploaded panel into this talk page so that others can see what we're both talking about.) --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 23:27, 6 February 2011 (EST)		::: I'd prefer no article, because the "guardian spirit" term as-presented in the line of dialog suggests absolutely nothing that we should examine further. It's just a common noun. A turn of phrase. It is not referencing about some capital-G capital-S "Guardian Spirit". It is not something we should attempt to build an article from, and certainly not to the incredible detail you managed to extrapolate from it somehow. (I've inlined your uploaded panel into this talk page so that others can see what we're both talking about.) --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 23:27, 6 February 2011 (EST)
			::::It sounds like this article was a doozy. But Prime's comment should be commented on in the [[religion]] article. Prime was some kind of agnostic theist before the Autobots met up with Primus and believed the (bullcrap) story he told them. (We all know Transformers are really evolved from levers and pulleys. It said so in issue 1.) - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 00:03, 7 February 2011 (EST)

ItsWalky at 04:27, 7 February 2011

2011-02-07T04:27:40Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:27, 7 February 2011
Line 1:		Line 1:
			[[Image:Muk97-guardianspirit.jpg\|right\|thumb\|300px\|]]
	Pardon my irritation, but what, exactly, of this article was bullshit?		Pardon my irritation, but what, exactly, of this article was bullshit?
	The second paragraph speculating on what, if anything the spirit could be? The note that it seems ot lack the gravitas associated with religious dogma?		The second paragraph speculating on what, if anything the spirit could be? The note that it seems ot lack the gravitas associated with religious dogma?
Line 10:		Line 11:
	::(Metatextually, its usage is consistent with that of [[Xal\|Great Xal]] and the other Cybertronian Zodiac signs of the Cybertronian Zodiac as used in TAAII, but I feel no need to push that connection.)		::(Metatextually, its usage is consistent with that of [[Xal\|Great Xal]] and the other Cybertronian Zodiac signs of the Cybertronian Zodiac as used in TAAII, but I feel no need to push that connection.)
	::Given my druthers, I'd probably move the examples-of-what-it's-not to a "see also" at the end, and basically re-render this as a 'type of superstition' article. Acceptable? -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 22:24, 6 February 2011 (EST)		::Given my druthers, I'd probably move the examples-of-what-it's-not to a "see also" at the end, and basically re-render this as a 'type of superstition' article. Acceptable? -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 22:24, 6 February 2011 (EST)
			::: I'd prefer no article, because the "guardian spirit" term as-presented in the line of dialog suggests absolutely nothing that we should examine further. It's just a common noun. A turn of phrase. It is not referencing about some capital-G capital-S "Guardian Spirit". It is not something we should attempt to build an article from, and certainly not to the incredible detail you managed to extrapolate from it somehow. (I've inlined your uploaded panel into this talk page so that others can see what we're both talking about.) --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 23:27, 6 February 2011 (EST)

Derik at 03:24, 7 February 2011

2011-02-07T03:24:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:24, 7 February 2011
Line 5:		Line 5:
	I do not debate the judgment of our hopped-up-on-painkillers Admin... but I feel "This entire article is bullshit" fails to convey that wisdom in sufficiently useful detail. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 19:57, 6 February 2011 (EST)		I do not debate the judgment of our hopped-up-on-painkillers Admin... but I feel "This entire article is bullshit" fails to convey that wisdom in sufficiently useful detail. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 19:57, 6 February 2011 (EST)
	: Prime's casual, off-hand usage of the term "guardian spirit" was clearly a common noun, having nothing to do with the fully-formed mythology you fabricated for it. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 20:25, 6 February 2011 (EST)		: Prime's casual, off-hand usage of the term "guardian spirit" was clearly a common noun, having nothing to do with the fully-formed mythology you fabricated for it. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 20:25, 6 February 2011 (EST)

			::So... you'd prefer the article addressed it in a much more generic sense?
			::I have no objection to this. But it ''does'' represent a sort of casual superstition on the part of Transformers, and should probably be documented somewhere.
			::(Metatextually, its usage is consistent with that of [[Xal\|Great Xal]] and the other Cybertronian Zodiac signs of the Cybertronian Zodiac as used in TAAII, but I feel no need to push that connection.)
			::Given my druthers, I'd probably move the examples-of-what-it's-not to a "see also" at the end, and basically re-render this as a 'type of superstition' article. Acceptable? -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 22:24, 6 February 2011 (EST)

ItsWalky at 01:25, 7 February 2011

2011-02-07T01:25:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:25, 7 February 2011
Line 4:		Line 4:

	I do not debate the judgment of our hopped-up-on-painkillers Admin... but I feel "This entire article is bullshit" fails to convey that wisdom in sufficiently useful detail. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 19:57, 6 February 2011 (EST)		I do not debate the judgment of our hopped-up-on-painkillers Admin... but I feel "This entire article is bullshit" fails to convey that wisdom in sufficiently useful detail. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 19:57, 6 February 2011 (EST)
			: Prime's casual, off-hand usage of the term "guardian spirit" was clearly a common noun, having nothing to do with the fully-formed mythology you fabricated for it. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 20:25, 6 February 2011 (EST)

Derik: Boojum

2011-02-07T00:57:58Z

Boojum

New page

Pardon my irritation, but what, exactly, of this article was bullshit?
The second paragraph speculating on what, if anything the spirit could be? The note that it seems ot lack the gravitas associated with religious dogma?
The whole concept of the article-- documenting one of a handful of times Transformers displayed non-formalized supernatural beliefs?

I do not debate the judgment of our hopped-up-on-painkillers Admin... but I feel "This entire article is bullshit" fails to convey that wisdom in sufficiently useful detail. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 19:57, 6 February 2011 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:58, 8 February 2011
Line 16:		Line 16:
	:::::The religion page would be fine. It ought be documented, but I don't think it necessarily ''needs'' its own article-- a note on another one is fine. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 00:30, 7 February 2011 (EST)		:::::The religion page would be fine. It ought be documented, but I don't think it necessarily ''needs'' its own article-- a note on another one is fine. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 00:30, 7 February 2011 (EST)
	::::::I just realized the religion page isn't in the normal in-universe fiction section style. It's in an essay format that don't really want to mess with. It would be hard to stick in a comment that Optimus Prime had some vague belief in a non specific guardian spirit before believing in Primus. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 12:31, 7 February 2011 (EST)		::::::I just realized the religion page isn't in the normal in-universe fiction section style. It's in an essay format that don't really want to mess with. It would be hard to stick in a comment that Optimus Prime had some vague belief in a non specific guardian spirit before believing in Primus. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 12:31, 7 February 2011 (EST)
			:::::::What's that you say? The Religion Article is improperly formatted like a dead-tree edition, which makes it difficult to append and adjust like a proper wiki article should be? -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 14:58, 8 February 2011 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:03, 7 February 2011
Line 12:		Line 12:
	::Given my druthers, I'd probably move the examples-of-what-it's-not to a "see also" at the end, and basically re-render this as a 'type of superstition' article. Acceptable? -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 22:24, 6 February 2011 (EST)		::Given my druthers, I'd probably move the examples-of-what-it's-not to a "see also" at the end, and basically re-render this as a 'type of superstition' article. Acceptable? -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 22:24, 6 February 2011 (EST)
	::: I'd prefer no article, because the "guardian spirit" term as-presented in the line of dialog suggests absolutely nothing that we should examine further. It's just a common noun. A turn of phrase. It is not referencing about some capital-G capital-S "Guardian Spirit". It is not something we should attempt to build an article from, and certainly not to the incredible detail you managed to extrapolate from it somehow. (I've inlined your uploaded panel into this talk page so that others can see what we're both talking about.) --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 23:27, 6 February 2011 (EST)		::: I'd prefer no article, because the "guardian spirit" term as-presented in the line of dialog suggests absolutely nothing that we should examine further. It's just a common noun. A turn of phrase. It is not referencing about some capital-G capital-S "Guardian Spirit". It is not something we should attempt to build an article from, and certainly not to the incredible detail you managed to extrapolate from it somehow. (I've inlined your uploaded panel into this talk page so that others can see what we're both talking about.) --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 23:27, 6 February 2011 (EST)
			::::It sounds like this article was a doozy. But Prime's comment should be commented on in the [[religion]] article. Prime was some kind of agnostic theist before the Autobots met up with Primus and believed the (bullcrap) story he told them. (We all know Transformers are really evolved from levers and pulleys. It said so in issue 1.) - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 00:03, 7 February 2011 (EST)