Talk:Magnificent Six - Revision history

Jackpot: /* Contemporary toy tie-in */

2025-08-06T18:52:33Z

Contemporary toy tie-in

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:52, 6 August 2025
Line 12:		Line 12:
	:I'm with Saix. This note seems pretty unnecessary. Also, the Notes section does have something in it, that being the Foreign Names subsection; there's several other pages that do the same thing. -- [[User:Cyberlink420\|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420\|talk]]) 02:33, 25 March 2024 (EDT)		:I'm with Saix. This note seems pretty unnecessary. Also, the Notes section does have something in it, that being the Foreign Names subsection; there's several other pages that do the same thing. -- [[User:Cyberlink420\|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420\|talk]]) 02:33, 25 March 2024 (EDT)
	:: I also agree with the removal. I mean, it's not exactly ''unique'' or ''interesting'' that a bunch of Autobots from 1984/85 are all part of a singular design ethos. That's just what the franchise ''is'' now and has been for a (too-) long time now. There is exactly zero chance they had the Six in mind, given that two of the bots didn't come until nearly two years after the first three. They were just working through Obvious G1 Guys. Now, if there was a CW-compatible Stampede, well... but they didn't make one of those. --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 04:15, 25 March 2024 (EDT)		:: I also agree with the removal. I mean, it's not exactly ''unique'' or ''interesting'' that a bunch of Autobots from 1984/85 are all part of a singular design ethos. That's just what the franchise ''is'' now and has been for a (too-) long time now. There is exactly zero chance they had the Six in mind, given that two of the bots didn't come until nearly two years after the first three. They were just working through Obvious G1 Guys. Now, if there was a CW-compatible Stampede, well... but they didn't make one of those. --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 04:15, 25 March 2024 (EDT)

			==Contemporary toy tie-in==

			[[:user:Saix\|Saix]], I've reinstated the note with changes. Per your deletion comment:

			a) No, this couldn't just as easily have been an Action Masters promo, because Sunstreaker and Silverbolt weren't AMs.

			b) It's not "speculative" that the Marvel UK stories at this time were connected to the European ''Classics'' line, unless the [[Earthforce#Continuity\|Earthforce]] page is wrong. Even without that page backing the point up, it's a heck of a coincidence that out of all the characters Furman had at his disposal in 1990, he just so happened to only pick [[Classics (Europe)#Toyline\|ones that were right then being re-released]] in the market he was writing for, down to the 5/6 "Classic Heroes" match. With a qualifier that that motivation isn't known with 100% certainty, this is valuable info about a very likely reason why this team is who it is, referencing facts I wouldn't expect many readers to have enough knowledge of to put together themselves. (Those facts being that Europe was getting rereleases in the early '90s at all, and that they corresponded so tightly with this team). I would otherwise expect the average reader to see this as just another random early-G1 conglomeration.

			- [[User:Jackpot\|Jackpot]] ([[User talk:Jackpot\|talk]]) 14:52, 6 August 2025 (EDT)

M Sipher at 08:15, 25 March 2024

2024-03-25T08:15:33Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:15, 25 March 2024
Line 11:		Line 11:
	Also, ''there's no point in even having a notes section in the first place if you're never going to actually put anything in it'', just saying. [[User:Banannixx\|Banannixx]] ([[User talk:Banannixx\|talk]]) 02:26, 25 March 2024 (EDT)		Also, ''there's no point in even having a notes section in the first place if you're never going to actually put anything in it'', just saying. [[User:Banannixx\|Banannixx]] ([[User talk:Banannixx\|talk]]) 02:26, 25 March 2024 (EDT)
	:I'm with Saix. This note seems pretty unnecessary. Also, the Notes section does have something in it, that being the Foreign Names subsection; there's several other pages that do the same thing. -- [[User:Cyberlink420\|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420\|talk]]) 02:33, 25 March 2024 (EDT)		:I'm with Saix. This note seems pretty unnecessary. Also, the Notes section does have something in it, that being the Foreign Names subsection; there's several other pages that do the same thing. -- [[User:Cyberlink420\|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420\|talk]]) 02:33, 25 March 2024 (EDT)
			:: I also agree with the removal. I mean, it's not exactly ''unique'' or ''interesting'' that a bunch of Autobots from 1984/85 are all part of a singular design ethos. That's just what the franchise ''is'' now and has been for a (too-) long time now. There is exactly zero chance they had the Six in mind, given that two of the bots didn't come until nearly two years after the first three. They were just working through Obvious G1 Guys. Now, if there was a CW-compatible Stampede, well... but they didn't make one of those. --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 04:15, 25 March 2024 (EDT)

Cyberlink420 at 06:33, 25 March 2024

2024-03-25T06:33:52Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:33, 25 March 2024
Line 10:		Line 10:

	Also, ''there's no point in even having a notes section in the first place if you're never going to actually put anything in it'', just saying. [[User:Banannixx\|Banannixx]] ([[User talk:Banannixx\|talk]]) 02:26, 25 March 2024 (EDT)		Also, ''there's no point in even having a notes section in the first place if you're never going to actually put anything in it'', just saying. [[User:Banannixx\|Banannixx]] ([[User talk:Banannixx\|talk]]) 02:26, 25 March 2024 (EDT)
	:I'm with Saix. This note seems pretty unnecessary. Also, the Notes section does have something in it, that being the Foreign Names subsection; there's several other pages that do the same thing.		:I'm with Saix. This note seems pretty unnecessary. Also, the Notes section does have something in it, that being the Foreign Names subsection; there's several other pages that do the same thing. -- [[User:Cyberlink420\|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420\|talk]]) 02:33, 25 March 2024 (EDT)

Cyberlink420 at 06:33, 25 March 2024

2024-03-25T06:33:42Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:33, 25 March 2024
Line 10:		Line 10:

	Also, ''there's no point in even having a notes section in the first place if you're never going to actually put anything in it'', just saying. [[User:Banannixx\|Banannixx]] ([[User talk:Banannixx\|talk]]) 02:26, 25 March 2024 (EDT)		Also, ''there's no point in even having a notes section in the first place if you're never going to actually put anything in it'', just saying. [[User:Banannixx\|Banannixx]] ([[User talk:Banannixx\|talk]]) 02:26, 25 March 2024 (EDT)
			:I'm with Saix. This note seems pretty unnecessary. Also, the Notes section does have something in it, that being the Foreign Names subsection; there's several other pages that do the same thing.

Banannixx: Title is self explanatory.

2024-03-25T06:26:19Z

Title is self explanatory.

New page

==The Possible Combiner==

In regards to Saix's reversion of my edit, I'd like to make a counter argument.

Firstly, coincidence or not, it's something that I think is worth adding because it ''still happened''; and I'm certainly not the first person that has had this idea or even attempted to add it before, to whoever person's or whatever people's weird chagrin, and I will most likely not be the last. It's not like lack of official fiction has completely derailed attempts at documenting mere "coincidences", either.

Secondly, as for the "annoying links" comment, this can be "fixed" by having each individual member listed with a link to the relevant toy from their name.

Thirdly, if I ''really'' wanted to be a pedantic asshole about the whole ordeal (and I won't), I could go track down and bother people that worked on the toylines, get a definitive "yes" or "no" answer, and then cite the conversation as a direct source and firmly say either "This is a neat idea, but we weren't thinking of that at the time", or "Yes, we totally intended that and we just never bothered to tell anyone".

Also, ''there's no point in even having a notes section in the first place if you're never going to actually put anything in it'', just saying. [[User:Banannixx|Banannixx]] ([[User talk:Banannixx|talk]]) 02:26, 25 March 2024 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:52, 6 August 2025
Line 12:		Line 12:
	:I'm with Saix. This note seems pretty unnecessary. Also, the Notes section does have something in it, that being the Foreign Names subsection; there's several other pages that do the same thing. -- [[User:Cyberlink420\|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420\|talk]]) 02:33, 25 March 2024 (EDT)		:I'm with Saix. This note seems pretty unnecessary. Also, the Notes section does have something in it, that being the Foreign Names subsection; there's several other pages that do the same thing. -- [[User:Cyberlink420\|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420\|talk]]) 02:33, 25 March 2024 (EDT)
	:: I also agree with the removal. I mean, it's not exactly ''unique'' or ''interesting'' that a bunch of Autobots from 1984/85 are all part of a singular design ethos. That's just what the franchise ''is'' now and has been for a (too-) long time now. There is exactly zero chance they had the Six in mind, given that two of the bots didn't come until nearly two years after the first three. They were just working through Obvious G1 Guys. Now, if there was a CW-compatible Stampede, well... but they didn't make one of those. --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 04:15, 25 March 2024 (EDT)		:: I also agree with the removal. I mean, it's not exactly ''unique'' or ''interesting'' that a bunch of Autobots from 1984/85 are all part of a singular design ethos. That's just what the franchise ''is'' now and has been for a (too-) long time now. There is exactly zero chance they had the Six in mind, given that two of the bots didn't come until nearly two years after the first three. They were just working through Obvious G1 Guys. Now, if there was a CW-compatible Stampede, well... but they didn't make one of those. --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 04:15, 25 March 2024 (EDT)

			==Contemporary toy tie-in==

			[[:user:Saix\|Saix]], I've reinstated the note with changes. Per your deletion comment:

			a) No, this couldn't just as easily have been an Action Masters promo, because Sunstreaker and Silverbolt weren't AMs.

			b) It's not "speculative" that the Marvel UK stories at this time were connected to the European ''Classics'' line, unless the [[Earthforce#Continuity\|Earthforce]] page is wrong. Even without that page backing the point up, it's a heck of a coincidence that out of all the characters Furman had at his disposal in 1990, he just so happened to only pick [[Classics (Europe)#Toyline\|ones that were right then being re-released]] in the market he was writing for, down to the 5/6 "Classic Heroes" match. With a qualifier that that motivation isn't known with 100% certainty, this is valuable info about a very likely reason why this team is who it is, referencing facts I wouldn't expect many readers to have enough knowledge of to put together themselves. (Those facts being that Europe was getting rereleases in the early '90s at all, and that they corresponded so tightly with this team). I would otherwise expect the average reader to see this as just another random early-G1 conglomeration.

			- [[User:Jackpot\|Jackpot]] ([[User talk:Jackpot\|talk]]) 14:52, 6 August 2025 (EDT)