Talk:List of female Transformers - Revision history

Cyberlink420 at 16:36, 9 December 2024

2024-12-09T16:36:43Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:36, 9 December 2024
Line 145:		Line 145:
	==Listing G1/Beast Era Female Transformers on their List by Era of First Appearance==		==Listing G1/Beast Era Female Transformers on their List by Era of First Appearance==

	Hi everybody, last week a number of us on the wiki discord were discussing making changes to the [[List of female Transformers]] by listing characters by sets of years of first appearance, which would mainly effect the G1 characters so to make it more clear when gal bots showed up as part of that massive continuity family. Iacon0 put together a [[Iacon0/Sandbox\|sandbox]] based on the years we had agreed to divide things by 84-86, 87-96, 97-06, 07-16, 17-26, and maintaining the Half-Qualifier list without era divisions. I dropped the ball and didn't notice that Agent 47 was proposing merging the G1 and Beast Eras (which I personally support because they are very intertwined but some colleagues opposed on the basis of bloat) and went ahead and listed a bunch of background characters who most likely are gals (a change I am also enthused about, for example, the two based on characters from [[Jem\|JEM and the Holograms]] in [[Ghost Stories]]), and had patiently waited three years for a go-ahead to do all this. Iacon0 and I agreed that the era division list could honor Agent 47's changes of combining the continuity families for this list, and I haven't heard any rebuttal from anyone so far about listing possible qualifiers. I had suggested we bring up the era change on the community portal (I didn't realize it should go here instead since it's not a site-wide change) but hadn't been able to act on checking Iacon0's prior to this post changes, and simply bringing up discussion wasn't acted on, no qualms about how this played out. As it is, the discussion is being brought up now, the reason dividing by eras of first appearance was considered important was because that way it would more effectively communicate to people new to transformers that these characters weren't all around for decades as of now. The year divisions were an agreed compromise over when different portions of media began and ended. We'd appreciate any feedback people have on this, thank you y'all. [[User:Causeway\|Causeway]] ([[User talk:Causeway\|talk]]) 14:57, 18 September 2024 (EDT)		Hi everybody, last week a number of us on the wiki discord were discussing making changes to the [[List of female Transformers]] by listing characters by sets of years of first appearance, which would mainly effect the G1 characters so to make it more clear when gal bots showed up as part of that massive continuity family. Iacon0 put together a [[User:Iacon0/Sandbox\|sandbox]] based on the years we had agreed to divide things by 84-86, 87-96, 97-06, 07-16, 17-26, and maintaining the Half-Qualifier list without era divisions. I dropped the ball and didn't notice that Agent 47 was proposing merging the G1 and Beast Eras (which I personally support because they are very intertwined but some colleagues opposed on the basis of bloat) and went ahead and listed a bunch of background characters who most likely are gals (a change I am also enthused about, for example, the two based on characters from [[Jem\|JEM and the Holograms]] in [[Ghost Stories]]), and had patiently waited three years for a go-ahead to do all this. Iacon0 and I agreed that the era division list could honor Agent 47's changes of combining the continuity families for this list, and I haven't heard any rebuttal from anyone so far about listing possible qualifiers. I had suggested we bring up the era change on the community portal (I didn't realize it should go here instead since it's not a site-wide change) but hadn't been able to act on checking Iacon0's prior to this post changes, and simply bringing up discussion wasn't acted on, no qualms about how this played out. As it is, the discussion is being brought up now, the reason dividing by eras of first appearance was considered important was because that way it would more effectively communicate to people new to transformers that these characters weren't all around for decades as of now. The year divisions were an agreed compromise over when different portions of media began and ended. We'd appreciate any feedback people have on this, thank you y'all. [[User:Causeway\|Causeway]] ([[User talk:Causeway\|talk]]) 14:57, 18 September 2024 (EDT)

	: I think all the "Possibly" entries are both pretty speculatory and bloating the list. Like, if they dont even have a name, I dont think we can claim they have a definite gender and belong here. [[User:AkibaSilver\|AkibaSilver]] ([[User talk:AkibaSilver\|talk]]) 15:02, 18 September 2024 (EDT)		: I think all the "Possibly" entries are both pretty speculatory and bloating the list. Like, if they dont even have a name, I dont think we can claim they have a definite gender and belong here. [[User:AkibaSilver\|AkibaSilver]] ([[User talk:AkibaSilver\|talk]]) 15:02, 18 September 2024 (EDT)

Ashendawn: /* Criteria for inclusion */ new section

2024-10-02T03:31:42Z

Criteria for inclusion: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:31, 2 October 2024
Line 157:		Line 157:
	:: And I've been working on a very similar set-up in a Sandbox myself! It would be great if there was a way to collapse columns; I was peeking around on Wikipedia and found that that had been proposed, but not yet implemented. I think being able to sort the list in its entirety by different categories would be extremely useful (for me at least) and it would be cool to implement elsewhere on the site -- but I also think it would be nice to be able to pare down the options you have to see at any given time. That said, I get it if none of that is exactly ideal formatting-wise. [[User:Ashendawn\|Ashendawn]] ([[User talk:Ashendawn\|talk]]) 19:44, 18 September 2024 (EDT)		:: And I've been working on a very similar set-up in a Sandbox myself! It would be great if there was a way to collapse columns; I was peeking around on Wikipedia and found that that had been proposed, but not yet implemented. I think being able to sort the list in its entirety by different categories would be extremely useful (for me at least) and it would be cool to implement elsewhere on the site -- but I also think it would be nice to be able to pare down the options you have to see at any given time. That said, I get it if none of that is exactly ideal formatting-wise. [[User:Ashendawn\|Ashendawn]] ([[User talk:Ashendawn\|talk]]) 19:44, 18 September 2024 (EDT)
	: How is "Honorable Mentions" instead of "Half-Qualifiers"? [[User:Ashendawn\|Ashendawn]] ([[User talk:Ashendawn\|talk]]) 20:30, 18 September 2024 (EDT)		: How is "Honorable Mentions" instead of "Half-Qualifiers"? [[User:Ashendawn\|Ashendawn]] ([[User talk:Ashendawn\|talk]]) 20:30, 18 September 2024 (EDT)

			== Criteria for inclusion ==

			I have a bit of a controversial take — I’m not sure it’s 100% fair to include the likes of “Cheesecake robot” on the list proper.

			I’d like to preface this with the fact that while I am coming at this primarily from an accuracy perspective, this is also coming from an AFAB who wants more than anything for this franchise to give us more non-male characters… but who also doesn’t like things being assumed about them based on the way they look. I am also aware that fictional characters are not the same as real-life people, and that 40 years makes a difference in terms of how people view the subject of gender in and out of media. There’s a lot of nuance involved, but as a wiki with pages about the subject of female Transformers, I think it’s fair to ask:

			What is the criteria for inclusion as a female Transformer?

			Living humans are mutable creatures, and society has grown to a point where the acceptance of gender as a spectrum that doesn't have clear boundaries and is ultimately decided by each individual for themselves is more widely spread than it was when this franchise started. Fictional characters in concluded media don't usually have that luxury — there are occasionally retcons or "word of god" scenarios, but aside from that, all we have is the text itself. We may make inferences based on context where the explicit text fails to make something clear, but that's where the criteria comes in. What is a fair way of deciding which characters belong on a list of lady bots, whose ratio to bots who use "he/him" (whether they be explicitly male or "genderless") is criminally small? How do we determine — on a wiki that tries to stay as accurate to the information it covers while also providing relevant context — who is woman-y enough for the woman club? Who is woman-y enough to be honorably mentioned? Who is a woman in our hearts, but doesn't have the evidence to "prove" it in the text?

			Is there anything that confirms [[Cheesecake robot]] as a she, or even a Transformer? Is the ruling is that because she's based on Arcee's character model, she counts? She looks conventionally "feminine" and considering that it was 1986, sure, it makes sense that they are assumed to be female. But is there anything in the script that implies their gender, or even their species?

			[[Combination granny and attack-dog-bot]] is also never explicitly confirmed as female or a Transformer — or even of Transformer technology, though obviously one might assume as much (the current phrasing in the article of "supposedly" implies that there was something said to suggest that it is TF tech, but nothing in the episode itself says so). Is them being a "granny" enough to imply they're female?

			I realize I’m being somewhat pedantic here — and if I really wanted to ‘’um, actually’’ myself I’d say that “she/her” pronouns do not necessarily mean female — but my point is that when a toy-only character whose tiny bio neglects to mention any pronouns or gender indicators, we try to make sure their page reflects that and doesn’t assume them to be male or a he, even if that might have been the intention or assumption of the creators of the time. Should the same thing be done in these cases?

			If we're going by the rule of, “It was 198x! of course a bot with zero kibble, a skinny, rounded/hourglass shape, and/or lipstick is female", what is the justification for bots like one of the [[Early war history records Transformers]] under Honorable Mentions, or one of [[Maccadam's bartenders]]? The former mentions "a hip structure and way of moving that suggest that it is female”, but I don’t see anything Arcee-y about them. I’m not saying they can’t be female and look like that! Just that if the “198x clause” (whose use, to be clear, I'm not advocating for) is used to argue that a bot is female, this seems to fall short of that.

			Please note, this is not coming from a desire to gatekeep what is and isn't feminine enough. In fact, my reasoning for bringing a lot of this up is ‘’because’’ assuming that because someone has a cinched waist or big chest or lipstick they're female or use she/her pronouns feels reductive to me. My point is, when it comes to the wiki and trying to maintain accuracy, it feels like a stretch to call a random background character — that doesn't look any more discernible as female than the one next to them and has no notes in the script or even any word of god denoting their intention to be female — female. I don't think they should be assumed male, either (see above), but why include them on this list? Additionally, when does the 198x clause run out? The 90s had much of the same attitude, and though it’s gotten a bit better with the passing years, we haven’t exactly reached the peak of diversity and understanding of the gender spectrum in the following 20+ years.

			I am glad to be corrected on any of this information — in my noting of what seems to be assumptions made by others, I very well may have made some of my own, or else just have been ignorant to certain info. And again, it’s not my intention to shear chunks of potential representation from the list. I’m the type who will take any opportunity to point to the tiniest piece of media and say, “Look! Bumblebee and Optimus Prime are canonically female <sub>in at least one continuity</sub>!” But how that’s determined is worth examining, I think. A suggestion below:

			What is the criteria for inclusion on the list proper?
			* At least one of the following:
			** The use of female, girl, woman, femme, fembot, etc. in reference to them (without them disputing it)
			** The use of she/her pronouns in reference to them (without correction)
			** Prior consistent depiction of the character as female in other continuities
			* Was a (female) Transformer/Cybertronian in at least one continuity
			What is the criteria for inclusion on the Honorable Mentions list?
			* At least one of the following:
			** Female robot, but not of the Transformer/Cybertronian species
			** Stereotypically feminine features or a shared mold/body type with one or more female Transformers, but not confirmed female themselves
			Do I kinda hate that this is something I feel the need to ask?
			* Yes, but I also think this page is worth having, and thus needs defining
			[[User:Ashendawn\|Ashendawn]] ([[User talk:Ashendawn\|talk]]) 23:31, 1 October 2024 (EDT)

Ashendawn at 00:30, 19 September 2024

2024-09-19T00:30:45Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:30, 19 September 2024
Line 156:		Line 156:
	:: Matching it with its sister page was something I also suggested. Of course there are a few outlier toys and the like, but I like the idea consistency/compatibility between the pages and think that would ultimately serve them well.		:: Matching it with its sister page was something I also suggested. Of course there are a few outlier toys and the like, but I like the idea consistency/compatibility between the pages and think that would ultimately serve them well.
	:: And I've been working on a very similar set-up in a Sandbox myself! It would be great if there was a way to collapse columns; I was peeking around on Wikipedia and found that that had been proposed, but not yet implemented. I think being able to sort the list in its entirety by different categories would be extremely useful (for me at least) and it would be cool to implement elsewhere on the site -- but I also think it would be nice to be able to pare down the options you have to see at any given time. That said, I get it if none of that is exactly ideal formatting-wise. [[User:Ashendawn\|Ashendawn]] ([[User talk:Ashendawn\|talk]]) 19:44, 18 September 2024 (EDT)		:: And I've been working on a very similar set-up in a Sandbox myself! It would be great if there was a way to collapse columns; I was peeking around on Wikipedia and found that that had been proposed, but not yet implemented. I think being able to sort the list in its entirety by different categories would be extremely useful (for me at least) and it would be cool to implement elsewhere on the site -- but I also think it would be nice to be able to pare down the options you have to see at any given time. That said, I get it if none of that is exactly ideal formatting-wise. [[User:Ashendawn\|Ashendawn]] ([[User talk:Ashendawn\|talk]]) 19:44, 18 September 2024 (EDT)
	: How is "Honorable Mentions" instead of "Half-Qualifiers"?		: How is "Honorable Mentions" instead of "Half-Qualifiers"? [[User:Ashendawn\|Ashendawn]] ([[User talk:Ashendawn\|talk]]) 20:30, 18 September 2024 (EDT)

Ashendawn: /* Listing G1/Beast Era Female Transformers on their List by Era of First Appearance */

2024-09-19T00:30:24Z

Listing G1/Beast Era Female Transformers on their List by Era of First Appearance

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:30, 19 September 2024
Line 156:		Line 156:
	:: Matching it with its sister page was something I also suggested. Of course there are a few outlier toys and the like, but I like the idea consistency/compatibility between the pages and think that would ultimately serve them well.		:: Matching it with its sister page was something I also suggested. Of course there are a few outlier toys and the like, but I like the idea consistency/compatibility between the pages and think that would ultimately serve them well.
	:: And I've been working on a very similar set-up in a Sandbox myself! It would be great if there was a way to collapse columns; I was peeking around on Wikipedia and found that that had been proposed, but not yet implemented. I think being able to sort the list in its entirety by different categories would be extremely useful (for me at least) and it would be cool to implement elsewhere on the site -- but I also think it would be nice to be able to pare down the options you have to see at any given time. That said, I get it if none of that is exactly ideal formatting-wise. [[User:Ashendawn\|Ashendawn]] ([[User talk:Ashendawn\|talk]]) 19:44, 18 September 2024 (EDT)		:: And I've been working on a very similar set-up in a Sandbox myself! It would be great if there was a way to collapse columns; I was peeking around on Wikipedia and found that that had been proposed, but not yet implemented. I think being able to sort the list in its entirety by different categories would be extremely useful (for me at least) and it would be cool to implement elsewhere on the site -- but I also think it would be nice to be able to pare down the options you have to see at any given time. That said, I get it if none of that is exactly ideal formatting-wise. [[User:Ashendawn\|Ashendawn]] ([[User talk:Ashendawn\|talk]]) 19:44, 18 September 2024 (EDT)
			: How is "Honorable Mentions" instead of "Half-Qualifiers"?

Ashendawn at 23:44, 18 September 2024

2024-09-18T23:44:56Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:44, 18 September 2024
Line 154:		Line 154:
	:: Addendum: Some of the sub-headers I think we'd probably want to merge, when we only got like, one or three characters per. Like, we could probably stand to mix the post-Hasbro-cartoon Japanese media characters into a single chunk. Not convinced we'd need to be super-granular for Aligned as a whole either (also, that section on main is missing ''Rescue'' Bots, whoops). --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 16:16, 18 September 2024 (EDT)		:: Addendum: Some of the sub-headers I think we'd probably want to merge, when we only got like, one or three characters per. Like, we could probably stand to mix the post-Hasbro-cartoon Japanese media characters into a single chunk. Not convinced we'd need to be super-granular for Aligned as a whole either (also, that section on main is missing ''Rescue'' Bots, whoops). --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 16:16, 18 September 2024 (EDT)
	:Option: [[User:Saix/FTF\|sortable table]]. [[User:Saix\|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix\|talk]]) 19:20, 18 September 2024 (EDT)		:Option: [[User:Saix/FTF\|sortable table]]. [[User:Saix\|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix\|talk]]) 19:20, 18 September 2024 (EDT)
			:: Matching it with its sister page was something I also suggested. Of course there are a few outlier toys and the like, but I like the idea consistency/compatibility between the pages and think that would ultimately serve them well.
			:: And I've been working on a very similar set-up in a Sandbox myself! It would be great if there was a way to collapse columns; I was peeking around on Wikipedia and found that that had been proposed, but not yet implemented. I think being able to sort the list in its entirety by different categories would be extremely useful (for me at least) and it would be cool to implement elsewhere on the site -- but I also think it would be nice to be able to pare down the options you have to see at any given time. That said, I get it if none of that is exactly ideal formatting-wise. [[User:Ashendawn\|Ashendawn]] ([[User talk:Ashendawn\|talk]]) 19:44, 18 September 2024 (EDT)

Saix: /* Listing G1/Beast Era Female Transformers on their List by Era of First Appearance */

2024-09-18T23:20:29Z

Listing G1/Beast Era Female Transformers on their List by Era of First Appearance

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:20, 18 September 2024
Line 153:		Line 153:
	: And as I think about it more, it's possible a cleaner "collist" would also make it easier to further break up these giant whompin' lists in a way that matches the breakdown of the main page. Hell, we could even provide a direct link to the relevant list-page section from the main page in each subheader. You read about how IDW expanded the crap outta the concept, and boom, there's a link right at the bottom of the section leading to a list of who showed up in the IDW continuities. I think having this page match the main page in general format/division will be much more beneficial to readers and keep the historical contexts (especially if we add the relevant years to the headers, like "''The Transformers'' cartoon (1984-1986)". Would it mean some characters appear on this list page more than once? Yes, of course. Would it be ''useful'' for them to? I'd say yes. Making these pages functional twins of each other, one providing the bulky contexts and the other providing the bulky specific numbers, but split via suite so neither page becomes monstrously huge, feels like a better move the more I mull it. --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 16:11, 18 September 2024 (EDT)		: And as I think about it more, it's possible a cleaner "collist" would also make it easier to further break up these giant whompin' lists in a way that matches the breakdown of the main page. Hell, we could even provide a direct link to the relevant list-page section from the main page in each subheader. You read about how IDW expanded the crap outta the concept, and boom, there's a link right at the bottom of the section leading to a list of who showed up in the IDW continuities. I think having this page match the main page in general format/division will be much more beneficial to readers and keep the historical contexts (especially if we add the relevant years to the headers, like "''The Transformers'' cartoon (1984-1986)". Would it mean some characters appear on this list page more than once? Yes, of course. Would it be ''useful'' for them to? I'd say yes. Making these pages functional twins of each other, one providing the bulky contexts and the other providing the bulky specific numbers, but split via suite so neither page becomes monstrously huge, feels like a better move the more I mull it. --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 16:11, 18 September 2024 (EDT)
	:: Addendum: Some of the sub-headers I think we'd probably want to merge, when we only got like, one or three characters per. Like, we could probably stand to mix the post-Hasbro-cartoon Japanese media characters into a single chunk. Not convinced we'd need to be super-granular for Aligned as a whole either (also, that section on main is missing ''Rescue'' Bots, whoops). --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 16:16, 18 September 2024 (EDT)		:: Addendum: Some of the sub-headers I think we'd probably want to merge, when we only got like, one or three characters per. Like, we could probably stand to mix the post-Hasbro-cartoon Japanese media characters into a single chunk. Not convinced we'd need to be super-granular for Aligned as a whole either (also, that section on main is missing ''Rescue'' Bots, whoops). --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 16:16, 18 September 2024 (EDT)
			:Option: [[User:Saix/FTF\|sortable table]]. [[User:Saix\|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix\|talk]]) 19:20, 18 September 2024 (EDT)

M Sipher: /* Listing G1/Beast Era Female Transformers on their List by Era of First Appearance */

2024-09-18T20:22:51Z

Listing G1/Beast Era Female Transformers on their List by Era of First Appearance

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:22, 18 September 2024
Line 151:		Line 151:
	: Looking at the page as it is now... yes, it could use a lot of work. Ans yeah, I'm not exactly feeling the "Half-qualifier" entries; at the very least, simply ''calling'' them that feels... well, it don't feel good. But I don't think doing this page by the proposed year breakups is that good of an idea. I mean, this is a list sub-page to just show you who already exists in what franchise chunk, all the historical context of ''when and where'' is over on the main page. This feels like trying to make this page do more than it's supposed to and just getting messy in a very arbitrary way in the process.		: Looking at the page as it is now... yes, it could use a lot of work. Ans yeah, I'm not exactly feeling the "Half-qualifier" entries; at the very least, simply ''calling'' them that feels... well, it don't feel good. But I don't think doing this page by the proposed year breakups is that good of an idea. I mean, this is a list sub-page to just show you who already exists in what franchise chunk, all the historical context of ''when and where'' is over on the main page. This feels like trying to make this page do more than it's supposed to and just getting messy in a very arbitrary way in the process.
	: Now, things that ''absolutely'' could use work, right off the top of my head, is making this page way, way less vertical. A lot of these lists can stand to have another column or two per "allegiance" and not waste so much space. And honestly I'm not sure the "order of appearance" is necessary at all... in fact, I'm not particularly sold on using the "character list" templates in the first place.		: Now, things that ''absolutely'' could use work, right off the top of my head, is making this page way, way less vertical. A lot of these lists can stand to have another column or two per "allegiance" and not waste so much space. And honestly I'm not sure the "order of appearance" is necessary at all... in fact, I'm not particularly sold on using the "character list" templates in the first place.
	: And as I think about it more, it's possible a cleaner "collist" would also make it easier to further break up these giant whompin' lists in a way that matches the breakdown of the main page. Hell, we could even provide a direct link to the relevant list-page section from the main page in each subheader. You read about how IDW expanded the crap outta the concept, and boom, there's a link right at the bottom of the section leading to a list of who showed up in the IDW continuities. I think having this page match the main page in general format/division will be much more beneficial to readers and keep the historical contexts (especially if we add the relevant years to the headers, like "''The Transformers'' cartoon (1984-1986)". Would it mean some characters appear on this list page more than once? Yes, of course. Would it be ''useful'' for them to? I'd say yes. Making these pages twins of each other, one providing the bulky contexts and the other providing the bulky specific numbers, but split via suite so neither page becomes monstrously huge, feels like a better move the more I mull it. --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 16:11, 18 September 2024 (EDT)		: And as I think about it more, it's possible a cleaner "collist" would also make it easier to further break up these giant whompin' lists in a way that matches the breakdown of the main page. Hell, we could even provide a direct link to the relevant list-page section from the main page in each subheader. You read about how IDW expanded the crap outta the concept, and boom, there's a link right at the bottom of the section leading to a list of who showed up in the IDW continuities. I think having this page match the main page in general format/division will be much more beneficial to readers and keep the historical contexts (especially if we add the relevant years to the headers, like "''The Transformers'' cartoon (1984-1986)". Would it mean some characters appear on this list page more than once? Yes, of course. Would it be ''useful'' for them to? I'd say yes. Making these pages functional twins of each other, one providing the bulky contexts and the other providing the bulky specific numbers, but split via suite so neither page becomes monstrously huge, feels like a better move the more I mull it. --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 16:11, 18 September 2024 (EDT)
	:: Addendum: Some of the sub-headers I think we'd probably want to merge, when we only got like, one or three characters per. Like, we could probably stand to mix the post-Hasbro-cartoon Japanese media characters into a single chunk. Not convinced we'd need to be super-granular for Aligned as a whole either (also, that section on main is missing ''Rescue'' Bots, whoops). --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 16:16, 18 September 2024 (EDT)		:: Addendum: Some of the sub-headers I think we'd probably want to merge, when we only got like, one or three characters per. Like, we could probably stand to mix the post-Hasbro-cartoon Japanese media characters into a single chunk. Not convinced we'd need to be super-granular for Aligned as a whole either (also, that section on main is missing ''Rescue'' Bots, whoops). --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 16:16, 18 September 2024 (EDT)

M Sipher: /* Listing G1/Beast Era Female Transformers on their List by Era of First Appearance */

2024-09-18T20:16:12Z

Listing G1/Beast Era Female Transformers on their List by Era of First Appearance

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:16, 18 September 2024
Line 152:		Line 152:
	: Now, things that ''absolutely'' could use work, right off the top of my head, is making this page way, way less vertical. A lot of these lists can stand to have another column or two per "allegiance" and not waste so much space. And honestly I'm not sure the "order of appearance" is necessary at all... in fact, I'm not particularly sold on using the "character list" templates in the first place.		: Now, things that ''absolutely'' could use work, right off the top of my head, is making this page way, way less vertical. A lot of these lists can stand to have another column or two per "allegiance" and not waste so much space. And honestly I'm not sure the "order of appearance" is necessary at all... in fact, I'm not particularly sold on using the "character list" templates in the first place.
	: And as I think about it more, it's possible a cleaner "collist" would also make it easier to further break up these giant whompin' lists in a way that matches the breakdown of the main page. Hell, we could even provide a direct link to the relevant list-page section from the main page in each subheader. You read about how IDW expanded the crap outta the concept, and boom, there's a link right at the bottom of the section leading to a list of who showed up in the IDW continuities. I think having this page match the main page in general format/division will be much more beneficial to readers and keep the historical contexts (especially if we add the relevant years to the headers, like "''The Transformers'' cartoon (1984-1986)". Would it mean some characters appear on this list page more than once? Yes, of course. Would it be ''useful'' for them to? I'd say yes. Making these pages twins of each other, one providing the bulky contexts and the other providing the bulky specific numbers, but split via suite so neither page becomes monstrously huge, feels like a better move the more I mull it. --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 16:11, 18 September 2024 (EDT)		: And as I think about it more, it's possible a cleaner "collist" would also make it easier to further break up these giant whompin' lists in a way that matches the breakdown of the main page. Hell, we could even provide a direct link to the relevant list-page section from the main page in each subheader. You read about how IDW expanded the crap outta the concept, and boom, there's a link right at the bottom of the section leading to a list of who showed up in the IDW continuities. I think having this page match the main page in general format/division will be much more beneficial to readers and keep the historical contexts (especially if we add the relevant years to the headers, like "''The Transformers'' cartoon (1984-1986)". Would it mean some characters appear on this list page more than once? Yes, of course. Would it be ''useful'' for them to? I'd say yes. Making these pages twins of each other, one providing the bulky contexts and the other providing the bulky specific numbers, but split via suite so neither page becomes monstrously huge, feels like a better move the more I mull it. --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 16:11, 18 September 2024 (EDT)
			:: Addendum: Some of the sub-headers I think we'd probably want to merge, when we only got like, one or three characters per. Like, we could probably stand to mix the post-Hasbro-cartoon Japanese media characters into a single chunk. Not convinced we'd need to be super-granular for Aligned as a whole either (also, that section on main is missing ''Rescue'' Bots, whoops). --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 16:16, 18 September 2024 (EDT)

M Sipher: /* Listing G1/Beast Era Female Transformers on their List by Era of First Appearance */

2024-09-18T20:11:29Z

Listing G1/Beast Era Female Transformers on their List by Era of First Appearance

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:11, 18 September 2024
Line 148:		Line 148:

	: I think all the "Possibly" entries are both pretty speculatory and bloating the list. Like, if they dont even have a name, I dont think we can claim they have a definite gender and belong here. [[User:AkibaSilver\|AkibaSilver]] ([[User talk:AkibaSilver\|talk]]) 15:02, 18 September 2024 (EDT)		: I think all the "Possibly" entries are both pretty speculatory and bloating the list. Like, if they dont even have a name, I dont think we can claim they have a definite gender and belong here. [[User:AkibaSilver\|AkibaSilver]] ([[User talk:AkibaSilver\|talk]]) 15:02, 18 September 2024 (EDT)

			: Looking at the page as it is now... yes, it could use a lot of work. Ans yeah, I'm not exactly feeling the "Half-qualifier" entries; at the very least, simply ''calling'' them that feels... well, it don't feel good. But I don't think doing this page by the proposed year breakups is that good of an idea. I mean, this is a list sub-page to just show you who already exists in what franchise chunk, all the historical context of ''when and where'' is over on the main page. This feels like trying to make this page do more than it's supposed to and just getting messy in a very arbitrary way in the process.
			: Now, things that ''absolutely'' could use work, right off the top of my head, is making this page way, way less vertical. A lot of these lists can stand to have another column or two per "allegiance" and not waste so much space. And honestly I'm not sure the "order of appearance" is necessary at all... in fact, I'm not particularly sold on using the "character list" templates in the first place.
			: And as I think about it more, it's possible a cleaner "collist" would also make it easier to further break up these giant whompin' lists in a way that matches the breakdown of the main page. Hell, we could even provide a direct link to the relevant list-page section from the main page in each subheader. You read about how IDW expanded the crap outta the concept, and boom, there's a link right at the bottom of the section leading to a list of who showed up in the IDW continuities. I think having this page match the main page in general format/division will be much more beneficial to readers and keep the historical contexts (especially if we add the relevant years to the headers, like "''The Transformers'' cartoon (1984-1986)". Would it mean some characters appear on this list page more than once? Yes, of course. Would it be ''useful'' for them to? I'd say yes. Making these pages twins of each other, one providing the bulky contexts and the other providing the bulky specific numbers, but split via suite so neither page becomes monstrously huge, feels like a better move the more I mull it. --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 16:11, 18 September 2024 (EDT)

AkibaSilver: /* Listing G1/Beast Era Female Transformers on their List by Era of First Appearance */

2024-09-18T19:02:08Z

Listing G1/Beast Era Female Transformers on their List by Era of First Appearance

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:02, 18 September 2024
Line 146:		Line 146:

	Hi everybody, last week a number of us on the wiki discord were discussing making changes to the [[List of female Transformers]] by listing characters by sets of years of first appearance, which would mainly effect the G1 characters so to make it more clear when gal bots showed up as part of that massive continuity family. Iacon0 put together a [[Iacon0/Sandbox\|sandbox]] based on the years we had agreed to divide things by 84-86, 87-96, 97-06, 07-16, 17-26, and maintaining the Half-Qualifier list without era divisions. I dropped the ball and didn't notice that Agent 47 was proposing merging the G1 and Beast Eras (which I personally support because they are very intertwined but some colleagues opposed on the basis of bloat) and went ahead and listed a bunch of background characters who most likely are gals (a change I am also enthused about, for example, the two based on characters from [[Jem\|JEM and the Holograms]] in [[Ghost Stories]]), and had patiently waited three years for a go-ahead to do all this. Iacon0 and I agreed that the era division list could honor Agent 47's changes of combining the continuity families for this list, and I haven't heard any rebuttal from anyone so far about listing possible qualifiers. I had suggested we bring up the era change on the community portal (I didn't realize it should go here instead since it's not a site-wide change) but hadn't been able to act on checking Iacon0's prior to this post changes, and simply bringing up discussion wasn't acted on, no qualms about how this played out. As it is, the discussion is being brought up now, the reason dividing by eras of first appearance was considered important was because that way it would more effectively communicate to people new to transformers that these characters weren't all around for decades as of now. The year divisions were an agreed compromise over when different portions of media began and ended. We'd appreciate any feedback people have on this, thank you y'all. [[User:Causeway\|Causeway]] ([[User talk:Causeway\|talk]]) 14:57, 18 September 2024 (EDT)		Hi everybody, last week a number of us on the wiki discord were discussing making changes to the [[List of female Transformers]] by listing characters by sets of years of first appearance, which would mainly effect the G1 characters so to make it more clear when gal bots showed up as part of that massive continuity family. Iacon0 put together a [[Iacon0/Sandbox\|sandbox]] based on the years we had agreed to divide things by 84-86, 87-96, 97-06, 07-16, 17-26, and maintaining the Half-Qualifier list without era divisions. I dropped the ball and didn't notice that Agent 47 was proposing merging the G1 and Beast Eras (which I personally support because they are very intertwined but some colleagues opposed on the basis of bloat) and went ahead and listed a bunch of background characters who most likely are gals (a change I am also enthused about, for example, the two based on characters from [[Jem\|JEM and the Holograms]] in [[Ghost Stories]]), and had patiently waited three years for a go-ahead to do all this. Iacon0 and I agreed that the era division list could honor Agent 47's changes of combining the continuity families for this list, and I haven't heard any rebuttal from anyone so far about listing possible qualifiers. I had suggested we bring up the era change on the community portal (I didn't realize it should go here instead since it's not a site-wide change) but hadn't been able to act on checking Iacon0's prior to this post changes, and simply bringing up discussion wasn't acted on, no qualms about how this played out. As it is, the discussion is being brought up now, the reason dividing by eras of first appearance was considered important was because that way it would more effectively communicate to people new to transformers that these characters weren't all around for decades as of now. The year divisions were an agreed compromise over when different portions of media began and ended. We'd appreciate any feedback people have on this, thank you y'all. [[User:Causeway\|Causeway]] ([[User talk:Causeway\|talk]]) 14:57, 18 September 2024 (EDT)

			: I think all the "Possibly" entries are both pretty speculatory and bloating the list. Like, if they dont even have a name, I dont think we can claim they have a definite gender and belong here. [[User:AkibaSilver\|AkibaSilver]] ([[User talk:AkibaSilver\|talk]]) 15:02, 18 September 2024 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:20, 18 September 2024
Line 153:		Line 153:
	: And as I think about it more, it's possible a cleaner "collist" would also make it easier to further break up these giant whompin' lists in a way that matches the breakdown of the main page. Hell, we could even provide a direct link to the relevant list-page section from the main page in each subheader. You read about how IDW expanded the crap outta the concept, and boom, there's a link right at the bottom of the section leading to a list of who showed up in the IDW continuities. I think having this page match the main page in general format/division will be much more beneficial to readers and keep the historical contexts (especially if we add the relevant years to the headers, like "''The Transformers'' cartoon (1984-1986)". Would it mean some characters appear on this list page more than once? Yes, of course. Would it be ''useful'' for them to? I'd say yes. Making these pages functional twins of each other, one providing the bulky contexts and the other providing the bulky specific numbers, but split via suite so neither page becomes monstrously huge, feels like a better move the more I mull it. --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 16:11, 18 September 2024 (EDT)		: And as I think about it more, it's possible a cleaner "collist" would also make it easier to further break up these giant whompin' lists in a way that matches the breakdown of the main page. Hell, we could even provide a direct link to the relevant list-page section from the main page in each subheader. You read about how IDW expanded the crap outta the concept, and boom, there's a link right at the bottom of the section leading to a list of who showed up in the IDW continuities. I think having this page match the main page in general format/division will be much more beneficial to readers and keep the historical contexts (especially if we add the relevant years to the headers, like "''The Transformers'' cartoon (1984-1986)". Would it mean some characters appear on this list page more than once? Yes, of course. Would it be ''useful'' for them to? I'd say yes. Making these pages functional twins of each other, one providing the bulky contexts and the other providing the bulky specific numbers, but split via suite so neither page becomes monstrously huge, feels like a better move the more I mull it. --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 16:11, 18 September 2024 (EDT)
	:: Addendum: Some of the sub-headers I think we'd probably want to merge, when we only got like, one or three characters per. Like, we could probably stand to mix the post-Hasbro-cartoon Japanese media characters into a single chunk. Not convinced we'd need to be super-granular for Aligned as a whole either (also, that section on main is missing ''Rescue'' Bots, whoops). --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 16:16, 18 September 2024 (EDT)		:: Addendum: Some of the sub-headers I think we'd probably want to merge, when we only got like, one or three characters per. Like, we could probably stand to mix the post-Hasbro-cartoon Japanese media characters into a single chunk. Not convinced we'd need to be super-granular for Aligned as a whole either (also, that section on main is missing ''Rescue'' Bots, whoops). --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 16:16, 18 September 2024 (EDT)
			:Option: [[User:Saix/FTF\|sortable table]]. [[User:Saix\|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix\|talk]]) 19:20, 18 September 2024 (EDT)