Talk:Multi-component Transformer - Revision history

Mazenoise: /* Metrosquad? */ new section

2009-08-09T21:19:59Z

Metrosquad?: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:19, 9 August 2009
Line 24:		Line 24:
	==ROTF Devastator==		==ROTF Devastator==
	It is not 100% clear, I admit, but I think even the toy is a combiner. The package says he is part of the "combiner class," and all of the components have names. I think a straightforward reading of Hasbro's battle bio (which is toy related) also implies the components are individuals. There is still a little bit of wiggle-room if someone wanted to think of Devastator as a multi-component Transformer, but I think the intention was for him to be made of individual Constructicons. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 10:29, 26 July 2009 (EDT)		It is not 100% clear, I admit, but I think even the toy is a combiner. The package says he is part of the "combiner class," and all of the components have names. I think a straightforward reading of Hasbro's battle bio (which is toy related) also implies the components are individuals. There is still a little bit of wiggle-room if someone wanted to think of Devastator as a multi-component Transformer, but I think the intention was for him to be made of individual Constructicons. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 10:29, 26 July 2009 (EDT)

			== Metrosquad? ==

			Are the other members of the Metrosquad really considered to be just "components" of Metrotitan? Because it always seemed to that the story pages were treating them as individual Transformers.. -[[User:Mazenoise\|Mazenoise]] 17:19, 9 August 2009 (EDT)

Starfield: ROTF Devastator

2009-07-26T14:29:11Z

ROTF Devastator

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:29, 26 July 2009
Line 13:		Line 13:
	::Use component-- Magmatron's the only TF to ever kinda-sorta deal with how this works... (mitotic spark,) so matching his terminology would be a bonus.		::Use component-- Magmatron's the only TF to ever kinda-sorta deal with how this works... (mitotic spark,) so matching his terminology would be a bonus.
	::(Besides "multi-component" reads easier than "multi-module.") -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 21:27, 3 June 2009 (EDT)		::(Besides "multi-component" reads easier than "multi-module.") -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 21:27, 3 June 2009 (EDT)
	~~{{spoiler\|Revenge of the Fallen (novel)\|June 30, 2009}}~~
	:::[[Arcee (Movie)]] is described as a "tripartite Cybertronian" in the ROTF novel, which is kinda neat. (No explanation as to how she got that way.) I guess the guys with two parts would be "bipartite Cybertronians." If I could make up a word, generally all of them would be "polypartite Cybertronians." - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 00:07, 7 June 2009 (EDT)		:::[[Arcee (Movie)]] is described as a "tripartite Cybertronian" in the ROTF novel, which is kinda neat. (No explanation as to how she got that way.) I guess the guys with two parts would be "bipartite Cybertronians." If I could make up a word, generally all of them would be "polypartite Cybertronians." - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 00:07, 7 June 2009 (EDT)
	::::I don't think making up words is a particularly good idea here. I'd suggest moving this article back to where it was. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 09:56, 27 June 2009 (EDT)		::::I don't think making up words is a particularly good idea here. I'd suggest moving this article back to where it was. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 09:56, 27 June 2009 (EDT)
Line 22:		Line 21:
	:Tripartite was a perfectly descriptive word for the concept as we know it. I couldn't resist. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 09:45, 27 June 2009 (EDT)		:Tripartite was a perfectly descriptive word for the concept as we know it. I couldn't resist. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 09:45, 27 June 2009 (EDT)
	::So is [[mitotic spark]], but that's not applicable to all of them either.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 10:44, 27 June 2009 (EDT)		::So is [[mitotic spark]], but that's not applicable to all of them either.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 10:44, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

			==ROTF Devastator==
			It is not 100% clear, I admit, but I think even the toy is a combiner. The package says he is part of the "combiner class," and all of the components have names. I think a straightforward reading of Hasbro's battle bio (which is toy related) also implies the components are individuals. There is still a little bit of wiggle-room if someone wanted to think of Devastator as a multi-component Transformer, but I think the intention was for him to be made of individual Constructicons. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 10:29, 26 July 2009 (EDT)

Starfield: Talk:Polypartite Cybertronian moved to Talk:Multi-component Transformer over redirect: Polypartite Cybertronian only applies to ROTF

2009-06-30T03:07:02Z

Talk:Polypartite Cybertronian moved to Talk:Multi-component Transformer over redirect: Polypartite Cybertronian only applies to ROTF

← Older revision	Revision as of 03:07, 30 June 2009
(No difference)

Rosicrucian: /* Polypartite */

2009-06-27T14:44:24Z

Polypartite

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:44, 27 June 2009
Line 21:		Line 21:
	I feel like (aside from the fact polypartite hasn't actually been used in fiction) this page is about multi-component transformers ''in general'', and Tripartite Transformers are a specific kind of that-- a kidn whose exact definition we don't know, and won't know until IDW gets its spotlights out. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 16:03, 26 June 2009 (EDT)		I feel like (aside from the fact polypartite hasn't actually been used in fiction) this page is about multi-component transformers ''in general'', and Tripartite Transformers are a specific kind of that-- a kidn whose exact definition we don't know, and won't know until IDW gets its spotlights out. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 16:03, 26 June 2009 (EDT)
	:Tripartite was a perfectly descriptive word for the concept as we know it. I couldn't resist. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 09:45, 27 June 2009 (EDT)		:Tripartite was a perfectly descriptive word for the concept as we know it. I couldn't resist. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 09:45, 27 June 2009 (EDT)
			::So is [[mitotic spark]], but that's not applicable to all of them either.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 10:44, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

KilMichaelMcC at 13:56, 27 June 2009

2009-06-27T13:56:23Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:56, 27 June 2009
Line 15:		Line 15:
	{{spoiler\|Revenge of the Fallen (novel)\|June 30, 2009}}		{{spoiler\|Revenge of the Fallen (novel)\|June 30, 2009}}
	:::[[Arcee (Movie)]] is described as a "tripartite Cybertronian" in the ROTF novel, which is kinda neat. (No explanation as to how she got that way.) I guess the guys with two parts would be "bipartite Cybertronians." If I could make up a word, generally all of them would be "polypartite Cybertronians." - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 00:07, 7 June 2009 (EDT)		:::[[Arcee (Movie)]] is described as a "tripartite Cybertronian" in the ROTF novel, which is kinda neat. (No explanation as to how she got that way.) I guess the guys with two parts would be "bipartite Cybertronians." If I could make up a word, generally all of them would be "polypartite Cybertronians." - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 00:07, 7 June 2009 (EDT)
			::::I don't think making up words is a particularly good idea here. I'd suggest moving this article back to where it was. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 09:56, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

	== Polypartite ==		== Polypartite ==

Starfield: /* Polypartite */

2009-06-27T13:45:10Z

Polypartite

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:45, 27 June 2009
Line 19:		Line 19:

	I feel like (aside from the fact polypartite hasn't actually been used in fiction) this page is about multi-component transformers ''in general'', and Tripartite Transformers are a specific kind of that-- a kidn whose exact definition we don't know, and won't know until IDW gets its spotlights out. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 16:03, 26 June 2009 (EDT)		I feel like (aside from the fact polypartite hasn't actually been used in fiction) this page is about multi-component transformers ''in general'', and Tripartite Transformers are a specific kind of that-- a kidn whose exact definition we don't know, and won't know until IDW gets its spotlights out. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 16:03, 26 June 2009 (EDT)
			:Tripartite was a perfectly descriptive word for the concept as we know it. I couldn't resist. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 09:45, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

Derik: /* Polypartite */ new section

2009-06-26T20:03:37Z

Polypartite: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:03, 26 June 2009
Line 15:		Line 15:
	{{spoiler\|Revenge of the Fallen (novel)\|June 30, 2009}}		{{spoiler\|Revenge of the Fallen (novel)\|June 30, 2009}}
	:::[[Arcee (Movie)]] is described as a "tripartite Cybertronian" in the ROTF novel, which is kinda neat. (No explanation as to how she got that way.) I guess the guys with two parts would be "bipartite Cybertronians." If I could make up a word, generally all of them would be "polypartite Cybertronians." - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 00:07, 7 June 2009 (EDT)		:::[[Arcee (Movie)]] is described as a "tripartite Cybertronian" in the ROTF novel, which is kinda neat. (No explanation as to how she got that way.) I guess the guys with two parts would be "bipartite Cybertronians." If I could make up a word, generally all of them would be "polypartite Cybertronians." - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 00:07, 7 June 2009 (EDT)

			== Polypartite ==

			I feel like (aside from the fact polypartite hasn't actually been used in fiction) this page is about multi-component transformers ''in general'', and Tripartite Transformers are a specific kind of that-- a kidn whose exact definition we don't know, and won't know until IDW gets its spotlights out. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 16:03, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

Starfield: Talk:Multi-component Transformer moved to Talk:Polypartite Cybertronian: Close to the term used in the novel.

2009-06-26T19:54:32Z

Talk:Multi-component Transformer moved to Talk:Polypartite Cybertronian: Close to the term used in the novel.

← Older revision	Revision as of 19:54, 26 June 2009
(No difference)

Interrobang: Talk:Multi-component Transformers moved to Talk:Multi-component Transformer: Singular form.

2009-06-07T04:30:14Z

Talk:Multi-component Transformers moved to Talk:Multi-component Transformer: Singular form.

← Older revision	Revision as of 04:30, 7 June 2009
(No difference)

Starfield: Minor novel spoiler

2009-06-07T04:07:56Z

Minor novel spoiler

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:07, 7 June 2009
Line 13:		Line 13:
	::Use component-- Magmatron's the only TF to ever kinda-sorta deal with how this works... (mitotic spark,) so matching his terminology would be a bonus.		::Use component-- Magmatron's the only TF to ever kinda-sorta deal with how this works... (mitotic spark,) so matching his terminology would be a bonus.
	::(Besides "multi-component" reads easier than "multi-module.") -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 21:27, 3 June 2009 (EDT)		::(Besides "multi-component" reads easier than "multi-module.") -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 21:27, 3 June 2009 (EDT)
			{{spoiler\|Revenge of the Fallen (novel)\|June 30, 2009}}
			:::[[Arcee (Movie)]] is described as a "tripartite Cybertronian" in the ROTF novel, which is kinda neat. (No explanation as to how she got that way.) I guess the guys with two parts would be "bipartite Cybertronians." If I could make up a word, generally all of them would be "polypartite Cybertronians." - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 00:07, 7 June 2009 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:29, 26 July 2009
Line 13:		Line 13:
	::Use component-- Magmatron's the only TF to ever kinda-sorta deal with how this works... (mitotic spark,) so matching his terminology would be a bonus.		::Use component-- Magmatron's the only TF to ever kinda-sorta deal with how this works... (mitotic spark,) so matching his terminology would be a bonus.
	::(Besides "multi-component" reads easier than "multi-module.") -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 21:27, 3 June 2009 (EDT)		::(Besides "multi-component" reads easier than "multi-module.") -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 21:27, 3 June 2009 (EDT)
	~~{{spoiler\|Revenge of the Fallen (novel)\|June 30, 2009}}~~
	:::[[Arcee (Movie)]] is described as a "tripartite Cybertronian" in the ROTF novel, which is kinda neat. (No explanation as to how she got that way.) I guess the guys with two parts would be "bipartite Cybertronians." If I could make up a word, generally all of them would be "polypartite Cybertronians." - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 00:07, 7 June 2009 (EDT)		:::[[Arcee (Movie)]] is described as a "tripartite Cybertronian" in the ROTF novel, which is kinda neat. (No explanation as to how she got that way.) I guess the guys with two parts would be "bipartite Cybertronians." If I could make up a word, generally all of them would be "polypartite Cybertronians." - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 00:07, 7 June 2009 (EDT)
	::::I don't think making up words is a particularly good idea here. I'd suggest moving this article back to where it was. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 09:56, 27 June 2009 (EDT)		::::I don't think making up words is a particularly good idea here. I'd suggest moving this article back to where it was. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 09:56, 27 June 2009 (EDT)
Line 22:		Line 21:
	:Tripartite was a perfectly descriptive word for the concept as we know it. I couldn't resist. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 09:45, 27 June 2009 (EDT)		:Tripartite was a perfectly descriptive word for the concept as we know it. I couldn't resist. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 09:45, 27 June 2009 (EDT)
	::So is [[mitotic spark]], but that's not applicable to all of them either.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 10:44, 27 June 2009 (EDT)		::So is [[mitotic spark]], but that's not applicable to all of them either.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 10:44, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

			==ROTF Devastator==
			It is not 100% clear, I admit, but I think even the toy is a combiner. The package says he is part of the "combiner class," and all of the components have names. I think a straightforward reading of Hasbro's battle bio (which is toy related) also implies the components are individuals. There is still a little bit of wiggle-room if someone wanted to think of Devastator as a multi-component Transformer, but I think the intention was for him to be made of individual Constructicons. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 10:29, 26 July 2009 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:44, 27 June 2009
Line 21:		Line 21:
	I feel like (aside from the fact polypartite hasn't actually been used in fiction) this page is about multi-component transformers ''in general'', and Tripartite Transformers are a specific kind of that-- a kidn whose exact definition we don't know, and won't know until IDW gets its spotlights out. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 16:03, 26 June 2009 (EDT)		I feel like (aside from the fact polypartite hasn't actually been used in fiction) this page is about multi-component transformers ''in general'', and Tripartite Transformers are a specific kind of that-- a kidn whose exact definition we don't know, and won't know until IDW gets its spotlights out. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 16:03, 26 June 2009 (EDT)
	:Tripartite was a perfectly descriptive word for the concept as we know it. I couldn't resist. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 09:45, 27 June 2009 (EDT)		:Tripartite was a perfectly descriptive word for the concept as we know it. I couldn't resist. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 09:45, 27 June 2009 (EDT)
			::So is [[mitotic spark]], but that's not applicable to all of them either.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 10:44, 27 June 2009 (EDT)