Talk:Second-in-command - Revision history

BerylRoll at 07:28, 8 May 2026

2026-05-08T07:28:12Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:28, 8 May 2026
Line 16:		Line 16:

	==Sub-Commander==		==Sub-Commander==
	Since when is there any Duke of Destruction besides [[Megastorm]]? -[[User:LV\|LV]] 18:10, 13 July 2007 (UTC)		Since when is there any Duke of Destruction besides Megastorm? -[[User:LV\|LV]] 18:10, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
	: That's what I want to know. Find me a citation where Movie Starscream is indicated to be the "Duke of Destruction," and I'll eat my freakin' hat. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 18:12, 13 July 2007 (UTC)		: That's what I want to know. Find me a citation where Movie Starscream is indicated to be the "Duke of Destruction," and I'll eat my freakin' hat. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 18:12, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
	*So do you guys want to extend this article to include Decepticon/Predacon seconds-in-command as well? -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 18:21, 13 July 2007 (UTC)		*So do you guys want to extend this article to include Decepticon/Predacon seconds-in-command as well? -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 18:21, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Detour: Undo revision 432271 by 92.241.165.66 (Talk) spambot again.

2010-03-04T04:53:33Z

Undo revision 432271 by 92.241.165.66 (Talk) spambot again.

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:53, 4 March 2010
Line 53:		Line 53:

	May I ask why the article was deleted after I had removed the unsourced stuff? -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 15:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)		May I ask why the article was deleted after I had removed the unsourced stuff? -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 15:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

	~~== hmm.. luv it. ==~~

	~~yes.. funny thoughts :)~~

92.241.165.66: /* hmm.. luv it. */ new section

2010-03-04T04:49:59Z

hmm.. luv it.: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:49, 4 March 2010
Line 53:		Line 53:

	May I ask why the article was deleted after I had removed the unsourced stuff? -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 15:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)		May I ask why the article was deleted after I had removed the unsourced stuff? -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 15:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

			== hmm.. luv it. ==

			yes.. funny thoughts :)

Abates: Undo revision 429832 by 92.241.165.66 (Talk)

2010-02-25T10:20:19Z

Undo revision 429832 by 92.241.165.66 (Talk)

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:20, 25 February 2010
Line 53:		Line 53:

	May I ask why the article was deleted after I had removed the unsourced stuff? -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 15:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)		May I ask why the article was deleted after I had removed the unsourced stuff? -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 15:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

	~~== я считаю: благодарю. ==~~

	~~а все таки: неподражаемо!! а82ч~~

92.241.165.66: /* я считаю: благодарю. */ new section

2010-02-25T10:00:42Z

я считаю: благодарю.: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:00, 25 February 2010
Line 53:		Line 53:

	May I ask why the article was deleted after I had removed the unsourced stuff? -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 15:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)		May I ask why the article was deleted after I had removed the unsourced stuff? -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 15:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

			== я считаю: благодарю. ==

			а все таки: неподражаемо!! а82ч

Bluestreak7: /* Sub-Commander */ dead links

2009-08-06T18:21:43Z

Sub-Commander: dead links

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:21, 6 August 2009
Line 25:		Line 25:
	*Of course you want to delete it. It's not like I provided any references...oh, wait a minute! I [[Sub-Commander#References\|did]]. -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 06:46, 12 August 2007 (UTC)		*Of course you want to delete it. It's not like I provided any references...oh, wait a minute! I [[Sub-Commander#References\|did]]. -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 06:46, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

	Is it just me, or has this article started to get out of hand? It uses the term "Sub-Commander" as if it's a specific rank, yet lists a bunch of character who I suspect have never been referred to as sub-commander. ~~[[:~~Category:Deputy Commanders]] suffers the same problem. I think we should change both of them to a more generalized "second in command" or "high-ranking characters" sort of thing. The way they are written currently borders on fanon. --[[User:Steve-o\|Steve-o]] 16:25, 14 August 2007 (UTC)		Is it just me, or has this article started to get out of hand? It uses the term "Sub-Commander" as if it's a specific rank, yet lists a bunch of character who I suspect have never been referred to as sub-commander. Category:Deputy Commanders suffers the same problem. I think we should change both of them to a more generalized "second in command" or "high-ranking characters" sort of thing. The way they are written currently borders on fanon. --[[User:Steve-o\|Steve-o]] 16:25, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
	*I just removed the unsourced ones. -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 16:34, 14 August 2007 (UTC)		*I just removed the unsourced ones. -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 16:34, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Line 38:		Line 38:
	::But see- that's part of the problem. "I thought it was equivalent to X..." those Japanese titles don't ''exist'' in American continuity, not even as 'different names for the same,' the Emperor of Destruction article gets into the specifics.		::But see- that's part of the problem. "I thought it was equivalent to X..." those Japanese titles don't ''exist'' in American continuity, not even as 'different names for the same,' the Emperor of Destruction article gets into the specifics.
	::Japan likes to declare the biggest toy int his year's assortment "Emperor of Destruction!" The ''result'' of that particular brain-dead mindset is that a renegade political dissident criminal ([[Megatron (BW)]]) holds the high-and-glorious rank of "Emperor of Destruction" marking him as the supreme commander of the Predacons. ...do you see the conflict here? The Predacons are a politcal body with at least 100,000 members, probably millions. Megatron's ''entire command'' consists of 5 Predacons. But he's ''Emperor of Destruction'' because... Japan.		::Japan likes to declare the biggest toy int his year's assortment "Emperor of Destruction!" The ''result'' of that particular brain-dead mindset is that a renegade political dissident criminal ([[Megatron (BW)]]) holds the high-and-glorious rank of "Emperor of Destruction" marking him as the supreme commander of the Predacons. ...do you see the conflict here? The Predacons are a politcal body with at least 100,000 members, probably millions. Megatron's ''entire command'' consists of 5 Predacons. But he's ''Emperor of Destruction'' because... Japan.
	::(Fuck, now I'm tempted to create a page called [[Reasons to ignore Japan]], and only the fact it'd be subject to increasingly-joyless dogpile edits is stopping me.)		::(Fuck, now I'm tempted to create a page called "Reasons to ignore Japan", and only the fact it'd be subject to increasingly-joyless dogpile edits is stopping me.)
	::Where was I? Equivilancy! So if we're now including 'equivalent' ranks, shouldn't we be listing vice-commander, etc?		::Where was I? Equivilancy! So if we're now including 'equivalent' ranks, shouldn't we be listing vice-commander, etc?
	::That's not a joke- the fact is has a ''holiday'' makes me think Sub-commander is a catchall term for any second-in-command with a large degree of autonomy, just like Personal Assistance get to celebrate Secretary's Day— the title of their job position isn't important- their ''duties'' are those of a secretary. (The SCD strip was poking fun at bosses forgetting Secretary's day, so I think it's an apt comparison.) -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 05:14, 7 September 2007 (UTC)		::That's not a joke- the fact is has a ''holiday'' makes me think Sub-commander is a catchall term for any second-in-command with a large degree of autonomy, just like Personal Assistance get to celebrate Secretary's Day— the title of their job position isn't important- their ''duties'' are those of a secretary. (The SCD strip was poking fun at bosses forgetting Secretary's day, so I think it's an apt comparison.) -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 05:14, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Geewunling at 15:18, 6 April 2009

2009-04-06T15:18:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:18, 6 April 2009
Line 13:		Line 13:
	I understand the need (common shared functions have to be covered somewhere), but wouldn't [i]alot[/i] of the problems with pages like this and others like it be solved by just listing the functions(US, Foreign, whatever) in the opening paragraph of every character. Or would that be too much work? Was there a reason functions shunned from in the first place? {{unsigned\|193.200.150.23}}		I understand the need (common shared functions have to be covered somewhere), but wouldn't [i]alot[/i] of the problems with pages like this and others like it be solved by just listing the functions(US, Foreign, whatever) in the opening paragraph of every character. Or would that be too much work? Was there a reason functions shunned from in the first place? {{unsigned\|193.200.150.23}}

	:Many characters have more than one function. Their functions apply at least to their tech-specs-continuity incarnations, but not always to their depictions in comic or cartoon media. Listing functions on character pages without accompanying lists or categories would make it impossible to find characters with related jobs. --[[User:Steve-o\|Steve-o]] 23:10, 7 September 2007 (UTC)~~<div id~~="~~wikia~~-~~credits~~"~~><br /><br /><~~small~~>From~~ [~~http~~:~~//transformers~~.~~wikia~~.~~com Teletraan~~ I: The ~~Transformers Wiki~~], a [~~http~~:~~//www~~.~~wikia~~.~~com Wikia~~] ~~wiki~~.~~</small></div>~~		:Many characters have more than one function. Their functions apply at least to their tech-specs-continuity incarnations, but not always to their depictions in comic or cartoon media. Listing functions on character pages without accompanying lists or categories would make it impossible to find characters with related jobs. --[[User:Steve-o\|Steve-o]] 23:10, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

			==Sub-Commander==
			Since when is there any Duke of Destruction besides [[Megastorm]]? -[[User:LV\|LV]] 18:10, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
			: That's what I want to know. Find me a citation where Movie Starscream is indicated to be the "Duke of Destruction," and I'll eat my freakin' hat. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 18:12, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
			*So do you guys want to extend this article to include Decepticon/Predacon seconds-in-command as well? -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 18:21, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
			:No, I want to delete it. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 18:46, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
			:I would say it should only document uses of the rank "Sub-Commander." The only one that comes to mind when I think of the term is Inferno in Beast Wars. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 18:28, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
			::I agree. Unless we can cite some other usages, I think this needs to redirect to Inferno, if it exists at all. [[User:Chip\|Chip]] 06:40, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
			*Oh, what's wrong with this one? -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 18:49, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
			*Of course you want to delete it. It's not like I provided any references...oh, wait a minute! I [[Sub-Commander#References\|did]]. -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 06:46, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

			Is it just me, or has this article started to get out of hand? It uses the term "Sub-Commander" as if it's a specific rank, yet lists a bunch of character who I suspect have never been referred to as sub-commander. [[:Category:Deputy Commanders]] suffers the same problem. I think we should change both of them to a more generalized "second in command" or "high-ranking characters" sort of thing. The way they are written currently borders on fanon. --[[User:Steve-o\|Steve-o]] 16:25, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
			*I just removed the unsourced ones. -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 16:34, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

			Do we need this page? If so, is there some way to lock it so the unsourced stuff doesn't find its way back in? [[User:Chip\|Chip]] 01:23, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

			While I appreciate that someone is actually ''using'' the 'send multiple footnotes to one reference' feature...? I think it's ''incredibly'' confusing to see numbered footnotes with section prefixes, and on a page this small the degree to which is is more confusing outweighs the degree to which it is better. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 02:32, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
			:I give up. Just delete the damn thing. I don't care any more. I'm not writting articles on ''canon'' ranks anymore. You people are just too demanding. -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 03:53, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
			::But you didn't source anything other than the Ultimate Guide references. Saying Grimlock was a "subcommander" via the "Marvel continuity" doesn't actually source anything. I want to know the issue number in which he was called a subcommander. Likewise, Megastorm only seems to be on the page because you've arbitrarily decided that "Duke of Destruction" means the same thing. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 04:05, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
			:I didn't ''put'' Grimlock on there. -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 04:16, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
			::But you did put a lot of others on there, who we've had to remove. And still, the "Duke of Destruction" thing remains. That IS yours, I checked. That's the reason you've faced so much opposition here. It's largely fanon. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 04:28, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
			:I put that on there because I was under the mistaken belief that it ''was'' the Japanese term for the second-in-command. I'll remove it. -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 04:44, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
			::But see- that's part of the problem. "I thought it was equivalent to X..." those Japanese titles don't ''exist'' in American continuity, not even as 'different names for the same,' the Emperor of Destruction article gets into the specifics.
			::Japan likes to declare the biggest toy int his year's assortment "Emperor of Destruction!" The ''result'' of that particular brain-dead mindset is that a renegade political dissident criminal ([[Megatron (BW)]]) holds the high-and-glorious rank of "Emperor of Destruction" marking him as the supreme commander of the Predacons. ...do you see the conflict here? The Predacons are a politcal body with at least 100,000 members, probably millions. Megatron's ''entire command'' consists of 5 Predacons. But he's ''Emperor of Destruction'' because... Japan.
			::(Fuck, now I'm tempted to create a page called [[Reasons to ignore Japan]], and only the fact it'd be subject to increasingly-joyless dogpile edits is stopping me.)
			::Where was I? Equivilancy! So if we're now including 'equivalent' ranks, shouldn't we be listing vice-commander, etc?
			::That's not a joke- the fact is has a ''holiday'' makes me think Sub-commander is a catchall term for any second-in-command with a large degree of autonomy, just like Personal Assistance get to celebrate Secretary's Day— the title of their job position isn't important- their ''duties'' are those of a secretary. (The SCD strip was poking fun at bosses forgetting Secretary's day, so I think it's an apt comparison.) -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 05:14, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

			I just think it's weird that the 'sub-commander' page doesn't mention [[Sub-Commander's Day]], or Magnus.

			Frankly I'm kinda iffy on rank pages like this. Knowing, say, Thundercracker has been a Sub-Commander doesn't tell me much. He's been in like 500 comics and he was someone's second-in-command ''once'', so what? How is Sub-commander more important than, say... Vice-Commander, which means the same thing, except dounds liek an actual rank and not a job description?

			Style note-- I '''strongly''' feel that pages like this should leave the disambigs on names visible in the lists. This article applies to no single continuity, and I had to mouseover to see that Scorponok was G1 Scorpy, not Energon Scorpy (Energonw as my first assumption, since he served under Arm Megatron in his backstory, whereas G1 Scorpy has always been the leader of his own group.) -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 04:52, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

			:Oh, it does mention SCD in passing- but that same comic establishes Magnus is one. And since there's an actual holiday named after the rank I feel liek it need more than an obscured-link passing reference. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 04:55, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
			:Well, you could add it, but as you've seen, you will need to source where he is listed as such. And I have no problem moving it to a general second in command page, as long as Sub-Commander redirects there. -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 04:59, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
			::Sourcing's not a problem-- It's explicitly and completely sourced int he SCD article-- I'd crib from it. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 05:14, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

			May I ask why the article was deleted after I had removed the unsourced stuff? -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 15:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

TX55: Talk:Second-in-Command moved to Talk:Second-in-command

2007-09-08T12:24:30Z

Talk:Second-in-Command moved to Talk:Second-in-command

← Older revision	Revision as of 12:24, 8 September 2007
(No difference)

TX55 at 12:01, 8 September 2007

2007-09-08T12:01:10Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:01, 8 September 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Those whose rank are Sub-Commander usually are Second-in-Command. While people who are Second-in-Command are not necessarily in "Sub-Commander" rank. --[[User:TX55\|TX55]] 09:10, 7 September 2007		Those whose rank are Sub-Commander usually are Second-in-Command. While people who are Second-in-Command are not necessarily in "Sub-Commander" rank. --[[User:TX55\|TX55]] 09:10, 7 September 2007

	=Temporary File=		==Temporary File==
	==What the hell is this?==		==What the hell is this?==
	Just wonderin'. [[User:Hooper X\|-hx]] 21:31, 7 September 2007 (UTC)		Just wonderin'. [[User:Hooper X\|-hx]] 21:31, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

TX55 at 09:41, 8 September 2007

2007-09-08T09:41:49Z

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ==What the hell is this?==
 Just wonderin'.  [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 21:31, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 : Oh, I was in a hurry yesterday, so I put the temporary file here. I'll delete it once ASAP. --[[User:TX55|TX55]] 02:29, 8 September 2007
 ==Ugh==

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:18, 6 April 2009
Line 13:		Line 13:
	I understand the need (common shared functions have to be covered somewhere), but wouldn't [i]alot[/i] of the problems with pages like this and others like it be solved by just listing the functions(US, Foreign, whatever) in the opening paragraph of every character. Or would that be too much work? Was there a reason functions shunned from in the first place? {{unsigned\|193.200.150.23}}		I understand the need (common shared functions have to be covered somewhere), but wouldn't [i]alot[/i] of the problems with pages like this and others like it be solved by just listing the functions(US, Foreign, whatever) in the opening paragraph of every character. Or would that be too much work? Was there a reason functions shunned from in the first place? {{unsigned\|193.200.150.23}}

	:Many characters have more than one function. Their functions apply at least to their tech-specs-continuity incarnations, but not always to their depictions in comic or cartoon media. Listing functions on character pages without accompanying lists or categories would make it impossible to find characters with related jobs. --[[User:Steve-o\|Steve-o]] 23:10, 7 September 2007 (UTC)~~<div id~~="~~wikia~~-~~credits~~"~~><br /><br /><~~small~~>From~~ [~~http~~:~~//transformers~~.~~wikia~~.~~com Teletraan~~ I: The ~~Transformers Wiki~~], a [~~http~~:~~//www~~.~~wikia~~.~~com Wikia~~] ~~wiki~~.~~</small></div>~~		:Many characters have more than one function. Their functions apply at least to their tech-specs-continuity incarnations, but not always to their depictions in comic or cartoon media. Listing functions on character pages without accompanying lists or categories would make it impossible to find characters with related jobs. --[[User:Steve-o\|Steve-o]] 23:10, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

			==Sub-Commander==
			Since when is there any Duke of Destruction besides [[Megastorm]]? -[[User:LV\|LV]] 18:10, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
			: That's what I want to know. Find me a citation where Movie Starscream is indicated to be the "Duke of Destruction," and I'll eat my freakin' hat. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 18:12, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
			*So do you guys want to extend this article to include Decepticon/Predacon seconds-in-command as well? -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 18:21, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
			:No, I want to delete it. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 18:46, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
			:I would say it should only document uses of the rank "Sub-Commander." The only one that comes to mind when I think of the term is Inferno in Beast Wars. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 18:28, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
			::I agree. Unless we can cite some other usages, I think this needs to redirect to Inferno, if it exists at all. [[User:Chip\|Chip]] 06:40, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
			*Oh, what's wrong with this one? -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 18:49, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
			*Of course you want to delete it. It's not like I provided any references...oh, wait a minute! I [[Sub-Commander#References\|did]]. -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 06:46, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

			Is it just me, or has this article started to get out of hand? It uses the term "Sub-Commander" as if it's a specific rank, yet lists a bunch of character who I suspect have never been referred to as sub-commander. [[:Category:Deputy Commanders]] suffers the same problem. I think we should change both of them to a more generalized "second in command" or "high-ranking characters" sort of thing. The way they are written currently borders on fanon. --[[User:Steve-o\|Steve-o]] 16:25, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
			*I just removed the unsourced ones. -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 16:34, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

			Do we need this page? If so, is there some way to lock it so the unsourced stuff doesn't find its way back in? [[User:Chip\|Chip]] 01:23, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

			While I appreciate that someone is actually ''using'' the 'send multiple footnotes to one reference' feature...? I think it's ''incredibly'' confusing to see numbered footnotes with section prefixes, and on a page this small the degree to which is is more confusing outweighs the degree to which it is better. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 02:32, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
			:I give up. Just delete the damn thing. I don't care any more. I'm not writting articles on ''canon'' ranks anymore. You people are just too demanding. -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 03:53, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
			::But you didn't source anything other than the Ultimate Guide references. Saying Grimlock was a "subcommander" via the "Marvel continuity" doesn't actually source anything. I want to know the issue number in which he was called a subcommander. Likewise, Megastorm only seems to be on the page because you've arbitrarily decided that "Duke of Destruction" means the same thing. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 04:05, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
			:I didn't ''put'' Grimlock on there. -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 04:16, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
			::But you did put a lot of others on there, who we've had to remove. And still, the "Duke of Destruction" thing remains. That IS yours, I checked. That's the reason you've faced so much opposition here. It's largely fanon. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 04:28, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
			:I put that on there because I was under the mistaken belief that it ''was'' the Japanese term for the second-in-command. I'll remove it. -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 04:44, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
			::But see- that's part of the problem. "I thought it was equivalent to X..." those Japanese titles don't ''exist'' in American continuity, not even as 'different names for the same,' the Emperor of Destruction article gets into the specifics.
			::Japan likes to declare the biggest toy int his year's assortment "Emperor of Destruction!" The ''result'' of that particular brain-dead mindset is that a renegade political dissident criminal ([[Megatron (BW)]]) holds the high-and-glorious rank of "Emperor of Destruction" marking him as the supreme commander of the Predacons. ...do you see the conflict here? The Predacons are a politcal body with at least 100,000 members, probably millions. Megatron's ''entire command'' consists of 5 Predacons. But he's ''Emperor of Destruction'' because... Japan.
			::(Fuck, now I'm tempted to create a page called [[Reasons to ignore Japan]], and only the fact it'd be subject to increasingly-joyless dogpile edits is stopping me.)
			::Where was I? Equivilancy! So if we're now including 'equivalent' ranks, shouldn't we be listing vice-commander, etc?
			::That's not a joke- the fact is has a ''holiday'' makes me think Sub-commander is a catchall term for any second-in-command with a large degree of autonomy, just like Personal Assistance get to celebrate Secretary's Day— the title of their job position isn't important- their ''duties'' are those of a secretary. (The SCD strip was poking fun at bosses forgetting Secretary's day, so I think it's an apt comparison.) -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 05:14, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

			I just think it's weird that the 'sub-commander' page doesn't mention [[Sub-Commander's Day]], or Magnus.

			Frankly I'm kinda iffy on rank pages like this. Knowing, say, Thundercracker has been a Sub-Commander doesn't tell me much. He's been in like 500 comics and he was someone's second-in-command ''once'', so what? How is Sub-commander more important than, say... Vice-Commander, which means the same thing, except dounds liek an actual rank and not a job description?

			Style note-- I '''strongly''' feel that pages like this should leave the disambigs on names visible in the lists. This article applies to no single continuity, and I had to mouseover to see that Scorponok was G1 Scorpy, not Energon Scorpy (Energonw as my first assumption, since he served under Arm Megatron in his backstory, whereas G1 Scorpy has always been the leader of his own group.) -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 04:52, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

			:Oh, it does mention SCD in passing- but that same comic establishes Magnus is one. And since there's an actual holiday named after the rank I feel liek it need more than an obscured-link passing reference. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 04:55, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
			:Well, you could add it, but as you've seen, you will need to source where he is listed as such. And I have no problem moving it to a general second in command page, as long as Sub-Commander redirects there. -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 04:59, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
			::Sourcing's not a problem-- It's explicitly and completely sourced int he SCD article-- I'd crib from it. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 05:14, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

			May I ask why the article was deleted after I had removed the unsourced stuff? -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 15:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)