Talk:Tyger Pax - Revision history

Starfield: /* Continuity identifier */

2010-08-09T01:04:22Z

Continuity identifier

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:04, 9 August 2010
Line 21:		Line 21:

	:::There was a bunch of discussion about it [[Transformers_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal/Archive44#Continuities\|here]]. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 20:49, 8 August 2010 (EDT)		:::There was a bunch of discussion about it [[Transformers_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal/Archive44#Continuities\|here]]. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 20:49, 8 August 2010 (EDT)
			::::Probably location articles, which aren't spit by continuity, are different than characters. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 21:04, 8 August 2010 (EDT)

Abates: /* Continuity identifier */

2010-08-09T00:49:12Z

Continuity identifier

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:49, 9 August 2010
Line 19:		Line 19:
	:: Who was this somebody? I don't like them! --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 18:09, 8 August 2010 (EDT)		:: Who was this somebody? I don't like them! --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 18:09, 8 August 2010 (EDT)
	:::Sorry about that. I had checked other articles and the ones with continuity identifiers followed the usage I mentioned. The anonymous editor had not used correct English in his edit and I was mainly just reverting that. I also remember that discussion, it must have made some impression in my memory. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 18:13, 8 August 2010 (EDT)		:::Sorry about that. I had checked other articles and the ones with continuity identifiers followed the usage I mentioned. The anonymous editor had not used correct English in his edit and I was mainly just reverting that. I also remember that discussion, it must have made some impression in my memory. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 18:13, 8 August 2010 (EDT)

			:::There was a bunch of discussion about it [[Transformers_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal/Archive44#Continuities\|here]]. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 20:49, 8 August 2010 (EDT)

Khajidha: /* Continuity identifier */

2010-08-08T22:13:49Z

Continuity identifier

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:13, 8 August 2010
Line 18:		Line 18:
	:There was a big push by somebody to change all the continuity identifiers from "''...in the XXX continuity...''" to "''...from the XXX continuity...''" so that just the first appearance could be listed. It sounded reasonable. I guess the moral of the story is that they should have checked the [[Help:New Pages#Continuity identifier\|policy page]] to see if it backed up their interpretation. It doesn't. Oops. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 18:05, 8 August 2010 (EDT)		:There was a big push by somebody to change all the continuity identifiers from "''...in the XXX continuity...''" to "''...from the XXX continuity...''" so that just the first appearance could be listed. It sounded reasonable. I guess the moral of the story is that they should have checked the [[Help:New Pages#Continuity identifier\|policy page]] to see if it backed up their interpretation. It doesn't. Oops. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 18:05, 8 August 2010 (EDT)
	:: Who was this somebody? I don't like them! --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 18:09, 8 August 2010 (EDT)		:: Who was this somebody? I don't like them! --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 18:09, 8 August 2010 (EDT)
	:::Sorry about that. I had checked other articles and ~~they~~ followed the usage I mentioned. The anonymous editor had not used correct English in his edit and I was mainly just reverting that. I also remember that discussion, it must have made some impression in my memory. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 18:13, 8 August 2010 (EDT)		:::Sorry about that. I had checked other articles and the ones with continuity identifiers followed the usage I mentioned. The anonymous editor had not used correct English in his edit and I was mainly just reverting that. I also remember that discussion, it must have made some impression in my memory. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 18:13, 8 August 2010 (EDT)

Khajidha: /* Continuity identifier */

2010-08-08T22:13:22Z

Continuity identifier

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:13, 8 August 2010
Line 18:		Line 18:
	:There was a big push by somebody to change all the continuity identifiers from "''...in the XXX continuity...''" to "''...from the XXX continuity...''" so that just the first appearance could be listed. It sounded reasonable. I guess the moral of the story is that they should have checked the [[Help:New Pages#Continuity identifier\|policy page]] to see if it backed up their interpretation. It doesn't. Oops. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 18:05, 8 August 2010 (EDT)		:There was a big push by somebody to change all the continuity identifiers from "''...in the XXX continuity...''" to "''...from the XXX continuity...''" so that just the first appearance could be listed. It sounded reasonable. I guess the moral of the story is that they should have checked the [[Help:New Pages#Continuity identifier\|policy page]] to see if it backed up their interpretation. It doesn't. Oops. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 18:05, 8 August 2010 (EDT)
	:: Who was this somebody? I don't like them! --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 18:09, 8 August 2010 (EDT)		:: Who was this somebody? I don't like them! --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 18:09, 8 August 2010 (EDT)
			:::Sorry about that. I had checked other articles and they followed the usage I mentioned. The anonymous editor had not used correct English in his edit and I was mainly just reverting that. I also remember that discussion, it must have made some impression in my memory. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 18:13, 8 August 2010 (EDT)

ItsWalky at 22:10, 8 August 2010

2010-08-08T22:10:04Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:10, 8 August 2010
Line 17:		Line 17:
	"We don't use continuity family identifiers like that. If you want to see which CF used it first, see what's in the fiction section first." [[User:ItsWalky]] (from revision history)		"We don't use continuity family identifiers like that. If you want to see which CF used it first, see what's in the fiction section first." [[User:ItsWalky]] (from revision history)
	:There was a big push by somebody to change all the continuity identifiers from "''...in the XXX continuity...''" to "''...from the XXX continuity...''" so that just the first appearance could be listed. It sounded reasonable. I guess the moral of the story is that they should have checked the [[Help:New Pages#Continuity identifier\|policy page]] to see if it backed up their interpretation. It doesn't. Oops. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 18:05, 8 August 2010 (EDT)		:There was a big push by somebody to change all the continuity identifiers from "''...in the XXX continuity...''" to "''...from the XXX continuity...''" so that just the first appearance could be listed. It sounded reasonable. I guess the moral of the story is that they should have checked the [[Help:New Pages#Continuity identifier\|policy page]] to see if it backed up their interpretation. It doesn't. Oops. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 18:05, 8 August 2010 (EDT)
	: Who was this somebody? I don't like them! --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 18:09, 8 August 2010 (EDT)		:: Who was this somebody? I don't like them! --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 18:09, 8 August 2010 (EDT)

ItsWalky: /* Continuity identifier */

2010-08-08T22:09:14Z

Continuity identifier

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:09, 8 August 2010
Line 17:		Line 17:
	"We don't use continuity family identifiers like that. If you want to see which CF used it first, see what's in the fiction section first." [[User:ItsWalky]] (from revision history)		"We don't use continuity family identifiers like that. If you want to see which CF used it first, see what's in the fiction section first." [[User:ItsWalky]] (from revision history)
	:There was a big push by somebody to change all the continuity identifiers from "''...in the XXX continuity...''" to "''...from the XXX continuity...''" so that just the first appearance could be listed. It sounded reasonable. I guess the moral of the story is that they should have checked the [[Help:New Pages#Continuity identifier\|policy page]] to see if it backed up their interpretation. It doesn't. Oops. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 18:05, 8 August 2010 (EDT)		:There was a big push by somebody to change all the continuity identifiers from "''...in the XXX continuity...''" to "''...from the XXX continuity...''" so that just the first appearance could be listed. It sounded reasonable. I guess the moral of the story is that they should have checked the [[Help:New Pages#Continuity identifier\|policy page]] to see if it backed up their interpretation. It doesn't. Oops. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 18:05, 8 August 2010 (EDT)
			: Who was this somebody? I don't like them! --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 18:09, 8 August 2010 (EDT)

Starfield: /* Continuity identifier */ new section

2010-08-08T22:05:49Z

Continuity identifier: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:05, 8 August 2010
Line 12:		Line 12:
	::http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2010/06/22/exclusive-learn-how-bumblebee-lost-his-voice-in-this-short-story-from-exodus-author-alex-irvine/ This{{unsigned\|173.71.105.23\|22:05, June 26, 2010 (EDT)}}		::http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2010/06/22/exclusive-learn-how-bumblebee-lost-his-voice-in-this-short-story-from-exodus-author-alex-irvine/ This{{unsigned\|173.71.105.23\|22:05, June 26, 2010 (EDT)}}
	::Not canon. But I don't see any reason it wouldn't deserve a pseudocanon treatment like [[Alignment]] and [[Dead Men's Boots]]. It is exactly the same situation. The creators putting out some unofficial fiction. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 23:29, 26 June 2010 (EDT)		::Not canon. But I don't see any reason it wouldn't deserve a pseudocanon treatment like [[Alignment]] and [[Dead Men's Boots]]. It is exactly the same situation. The creators putting out some unofficial fiction. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 23:29, 26 June 2010 (EDT)

			== Continuity identifier ==

			"We don't use continuity family identifiers like that. If you want to see which CF used it first, see what's in the fiction section first." [[User:ItsWalky]] (from revision history)
			:There was a big push by somebody to change all the continuity identifiers from "''...in the XXX continuity...''" to "''...from the XXX continuity...''" so that just the first appearance could be listed. It sounded reasonable. I guess the moral of the story is that they should have checked the [[Help:New Pages#Continuity identifier\|policy page]] to see if it backed up their interpretation. It doesn't. Oops. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 18:05, 8 August 2010 (EDT)

Starfield: /* Bumblebee at Tyger Pax */

2010-06-27T03:29:32Z

Bumblebee at Tyger Pax

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:29, 27 June 2010
Line 7:		Line 7:

	==Bumblebee at Tyger Pax==		==Bumblebee at Tyger Pax==
	Anyone know if this is considered canon? It's not part of the Exodus book, and as far as I can tell it can only be found in an MTV blog post without any sort of Hasbro copyright claims...		Anyone know if this is considered canon? It's not part of the Exodus book, and as far as I can tell it can only be found in an MTV blog post without any sort of Hasbro copyright claims...{{unsigned\|173.71.105.23\|20:26, June 26, 2010 (EDT)}}

	:If WHAT is considered canon?--[[Special:Contributions/76.28.76.206\|76.28.76.206]] 22:13, 26 June 2010 (EDT)		:If WHAT is considered canon?--[[Special:Contributions/76.28.76.206\|76.28.76.206]] 22:13, 26 June 2010 (EDT)
	::http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2010/06/22/exclusive-learn-how-bumblebee-lost-his-voice-in-this-short-story-from-exodus-author-alex-irvine/ This		::http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2010/06/22/exclusive-learn-how-bumblebee-lost-his-voice-in-this-short-story-from-exodus-author-alex-irvine/ This{{unsigned\|173.71.105.23\|22:05, June 26, 2010 (EDT)}}
			::Not canon. But I don't see any reason it wouldn't deserve a pseudocanon treatment like [[Alignment]] and [[Dead Men's Boots]]. It is exactly the same situation. The creators putting out some unofficial fiction. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 23:29, 26 June 2010 (EDT)

173.71.105.23: /* Bumblebee at Tyger Pax */

2010-06-27T03:05:37Z

Bumblebee at Tyger Pax

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:05, 27 June 2010
Line 10:		Line 10:

	:If WHAT is considered canon?--[[Special:Contributions/76.28.76.206\|76.28.76.206]] 22:13, 26 June 2010 (EDT)		:If WHAT is considered canon?--[[Special:Contributions/76.28.76.206\|76.28.76.206]] 22:13, 26 June 2010 (EDT)
			::http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2010/06/22/exclusive-learn-how-bumblebee-lost-his-voice-in-this-short-story-from-exodus-author-alex-irvine/ This

76.28.76.206 at 02:13, 27 June 2010

2010-06-27T02:13:47Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:13, 27 June 2010
Line 8:		Line 8:
	==Bumblebee at Tyger Pax==		==Bumblebee at Tyger Pax==
	Anyone know if this is considered canon? It's not part of the Exodus book, and as far as I can tell it can only be found in an MTV blog post without any sort of Hasbro copyright claims...		Anyone know if this is considered canon? It's not part of the Exodus book, and as far as I can tell it can only be found in an MTV blog post without any sort of Hasbro copyright claims...

			:If WHAT is considered canon?--[[Special:Contributions/76.28.76.206\|76.28.76.206]] 22:13, 26 June 2010 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:49, 9 August 2010
Line 19:		Line 19:
	:: Who was this somebody? I don't like them! --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 18:09, 8 August 2010 (EDT)		:: Who was this somebody? I don't like them! --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 18:09, 8 August 2010 (EDT)
	:::Sorry about that. I had checked other articles and the ones with continuity identifiers followed the usage I mentioned. The anonymous editor had not used correct English in his edit and I was mainly just reverting that. I also remember that discussion, it must have made some impression in my memory. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 18:13, 8 August 2010 (EDT)		:::Sorry about that. I had checked other articles and the ones with continuity identifiers followed the usage I mentioned. The anonymous editor had not used correct English in his edit and I was mainly just reverting that. I also remember that discussion, it must have made some impression in my memory. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 18:13, 8 August 2010 (EDT)

			:::There was a bunch of discussion about it [[Transformers_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal/Archive44#Continuities\|here]]. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 20:49, 8 August 2010 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:13, 8 August 2010
Line 18:		Line 18:
	:There was a big push by somebody to change all the continuity identifiers from "''...in the XXX continuity...''" to "''...from the XXX continuity...''" so that just the first appearance could be listed. It sounded reasonable. I guess the moral of the story is that they should have checked the [[Help:New Pages#Continuity identifier\|policy page]] to see if it backed up their interpretation. It doesn't. Oops. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 18:05, 8 August 2010 (EDT)		:There was a big push by somebody to change all the continuity identifiers from "''...in the XXX continuity...''" to "''...from the XXX continuity...''" so that just the first appearance could be listed. It sounded reasonable. I guess the moral of the story is that they should have checked the [[Help:New Pages#Continuity identifier\|policy page]] to see if it backed up their interpretation. It doesn't. Oops. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 18:05, 8 August 2010 (EDT)
	:: Who was this somebody? I don't like them! --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 18:09, 8 August 2010 (EDT)		:: Who was this somebody? I don't like them! --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 18:09, 8 August 2010 (EDT)
	:::Sorry about that. I had checked other articles and ~~they~~ followed the usage I mentioned. The anonymous editor had not used correct English in his edit and I was mainly just reverting that. I also remember that discussion, it must have made some impression in my memory. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 18:13, 8 August 2010 (EDT)		:::Sorry about that. I had checked other articles and the ones with continuity identifiers followed the usage I mentioned. The anonymous editor had not used correct English in his edit and I was mainly just reverting that. I also remember that discussion, it must have made some impression in my memory. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 18:13, 8 August 2010 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:13, 8 August 2010
Line 18:		Line 18:
	:There was a big push by somebody to change all the continuity identifiers from "''...in the XXX continuity...''" to "''...from the XXX continuity...''" so that just the first appearance could be listed. It sounded reasonable. I guess the moral of the story is that they should have checked the [[Help:New Pages#Continuity identifier\|policy page]] to see if it backed up their interpretation. It doesn't. Oops. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 18:05, 8 August 2010 (EDT)		:There was a big push by somebody to change all the continuity identifiers from "''...in the XXX continuity...''" to "''...from the XXX continuity...''" so that just the first appearance could be listed. It sounded reasonable. I guess the moral of the story is that they should have checked the [[Help:New Pages#Continuity identifier\|policy page]] to see if it backed up their interpretation. It doesn't. Oops. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 18:05, 8 August 2010 (EDT)
	:: Who was this somebody? I don't like them! --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 18:09, 8 August 2010 (EDT)		:: Who was this somebody? I don't like them! --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 18:09, 8 August 2010 (EDT)
			:::Sorry about that. I had checked other articles and they followed the usage I mentioned. The anonymous editor had not used correct English in his edit and I was mainly just reverting that. I also remember that discussion, it must have made some impression in my memory. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 18:13, 8 August 2010 (EDT)