Talk:Ursa Magnus - Revision history

NexusShard17 at 22:39, 9 November 2018

2018-11-09T22:39:11Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:39, 9 November 2018
Line 33:		Line 33:
	::::The criteria for whether or not any given unnamed background/generic/filler/whatever-type character gets an article should absolutely NOT include "was this guy originally someone's fanfic character?" Because, really, what difference does that make? If a writer or artist creates someone new on the spot to fill some tiny role, they get an article, but if he/she plugs in a character that already existed in their fanfic or their friend's, that's disqualifying? What? I don't see the logic, there. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 23:14, 2 March 2012 (EST)		::::The criteria for whether or not any given unnamed background/generic/filler/whatever-type character gets an article should absolutely NOT include "was this guy originally someone's fanfic character?" Because, really, what difference does that make? If a writer or artist creates someone new on the spot to fill some tiny role, they get an article, but if he/she plugs in a character that already existed in their fanfic or their friend's, that's disqualifying? What? I don't see the logic, there. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 23:14, 2 March 2012 (EST)
	:::::Also, I don't know what exactly the criteria ''should'' be for when such a character warrants an article of their own, either. But, if [[AlbinoBumbleBee]] and [[Bluster\|a jokey "explanation" Furman made on his blog]] get articles, then it seems the threshold has been set fairly low. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 00:14, 3 March 2012 (EST)		:::::Also, I don't know what exactly the criteria ''should'' be for when such a character warrants an article of their own, either. But, if [[AlbinoBumbleBee]] and [[Bluster\|a jokey "explanation" Furman made on his blog]] get articles, then it seems the threshold has been set fairly low. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 00:14, 3 March 2012 (EST)
	::::::Considering how we have guys like [[Christmas Maximus]], [[Ancient Autobot survivor]], [['70s pimp]], [[Stormbringer\|Dia Battles Transformer]], [[Bobby Bolivia's mammy]], and many others, I think the established criteria is "if somebody feels like making an article on a character of interest". Excluding pre-existing fan-characters from that is silly. [[User:Interrobang\|—Interrobang]] 00:25, 3 March 2012 (EST)		::::::Considering how we have guys like [[Peritus Maximus\|Christmas Maximus]], [[Ancient Autobot survivor]], [['70s pimp]], [[Stormbringer\|Dia Battles Transformer]], [[Bobby Bolivia's mammy]], and many others, I think the established criteria is "if somebody feels like making an article on a character of interest". Excluding pre-existing fan-characters from that is silly. [[User:Interrobang\|—Interrobang]] 00:25, 3 March 2012 (EST)
	:::::::Yeah, I'm not sure why people seem to have such a big problem with this particular character. I'm in favour of bringing the article back from the dead. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 01:12, 3 March 2012 (EST)		:::::::Yeah, I'm not sure why people seem to have such a big problem with this particular character. I'm in favour of bringing the article back from the dead. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 01:12, 3 March 2012 (EST)

Saix at 01:09, 17 September 2015

2015-09-17T01:09:50Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:09, 17 September 2015
Line 33:		Line 33:
	::::The criteria for whether or not any given unnamed background/generic/filler/whatever-type character gets an article should absolutely NOT include "was this guy originally someone's fanfic character?" Because, really, what difference does that make? If a writer or artist creates someone new on the spot to fill some tiny role, they get an article, but if he/she plugs in a character that already existed in their fanfic or their friend's, that's disqualifying? What? I don't see the logic, there. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 23:14, 2 March 2012 (EST)		::::The criteria for whether or not any given unnamed background/generic/filler/whatever-type character gets an article should absolutely NOT include "was this guy originally someone's fanfic character?" Because, really, what difference does that make? If a writer or artist creates someone new on the spot to fill some tiny role, they get an article, but if he/she plugs in a character that already existed in their fanfic or their friend's, that's disqualifying? What? I don't see the logic, there. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 23:14, 2 March 2012 (EST)
	:::::Also, I don't know what exactly the criteria ''should'' be for when such a character warrants an article of their own, either. But, if [[AlbinoBumbleBee]] and [[Bluster\|a jokey "explanation" Furman made on his blog]] get articles, then it seems the threshold has been set fairly low. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 00:14, 3 March 2012 (EST)		:::::Also, I don't know what exactly the criteria ''should'' be for when such a character warrants an article of their own, either. But, if [[AlbinoBumbleBee]] and [[Bluster\|a jokey "explanation" Furman made on his blog]] get articles, then it seems the threshold has been set fairly low. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 00:14, 3 March 2012 (EST)
	::::::Considering how we have guys like [[Christmas Maximus]], [[Ancient Autobot survivor]], [['70s pimp]], [[Dia Battles Transformer]], [[Bobby Bolivia's mammy]], and many others, I think the established criteria is "if somebody feels like making an article on a character of interest". Excluding pre-existing fan-characters from that is silly. [[User:Interrobang\|—Interrobang]] 00:25, 3 March 2012 (EST)		::::::Considering how we have guys like [[Christmas Maximus]], [[Ancient Autobot survivor]], [['70s pimp]], [[Stormbringer\|Dia Battles Transformer]], [[Bobby Bolivia's mammy]], and many others, I think the established criteria is "if somebody feels like making an article on a character of interest". Excluding pre-existing fan-characters from that is silly. [[User:Interrobang\|—Interrobang]] 00:25, 3 March 2012 (EST)
	:::::::Yeah, I'm not sure why people seem to have such a big problem with this particular character. I'm in favour of bringing the article back from the dead. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 01:12, 3 March 2012 (EST)		:::::::Yeah, I'm not sure why people seem to have such a big problem with this particular character. I'm in favour of bringing the article back from the dead. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 01:12, 3 March 2012 (EST)

Nemesis Primal: I know I'm late to the party, but I still felt I might as well say my piece.

2014-05-23T04:31:25Z

I know I'm late to the party, but I still felt I might as well say my piece.

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:31, 23 May 2014
Line 43:		Line 43:
	So it's Pete's word that is indeed the Transtech version of Ursa Magnus. So do Transtech bots have the Maximal faction? Or would he be an Autobot then? Havn't read all the Axium fiction... --[[Special:Contributions/76.28.76.206\|76.28.76.206]] 16:37, 1 March 2012 (EST)		So it's Pete's word that is indeed the Transtech version of Ursa Magnus. So do Transtech bots have the Maximal faction? Or would he be an Autobot then? Havn't read all the Axium fiction... --[[Special:Contributions/76.28.76.206\|76.28.76.206]] 16:37, 1 March 2012 (EST)
	: If he's indeed a TransTech, he'd be an Autobot. Cheetor and Rhinox are both Autobots, after all. I don't think there are any TransTech Maximals or Predacons. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 16:39, 1 March 2012 (EST)		: If he's indeed a TransTech, he'd be an Autobot. Cheetor and Rhinox are both Autobots, after all. I don't think there are any TransTech Maximals or Predacons. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 16:39, 1 March 2012 (EST)
			:: Nothing in the panel he cameos in marks his faction, and that's more or less all that's official regardng him, so I propose we just leave that space blank. --[[User:Nemesis Primal\|Nemesis Primal]] ([[User talk:Nemesis Primal\|talk]]) 00:31, 23 May 2014 (EDT)
	<references/>		<references/>

Abates: /* Delete */

2014-02-08T01:02:06Z

Delete

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:02, 8 February 2014
Line 24:		Line 24:
	:::::::I'm not sure why you think those precedents need to be avoided, Monzo. [[User:Interrobang\|—Interrobang]] 18:33, 2 March 2012 (EST)		:::::::I'm not sure why you think those precedents need to be avoided, Monzo. [[User:Interrobang\|—Interrobang]] 18:33, 2 March 2012 (EST)
	::::::::1. This isn't drama, it's discussion and it's the only way decisions can be made here. 2. This isn't about hatred of a particular fan character either -- I don't know Ursa Magnus from Adam. As I quoted before, this character isn't named, he doesn't do anything of note. The only thing OF note about him is the fact that it's someone's fan-character. At most, it should be a footnote on the comic's page. And for the record, I'm all for deleting the pages for Saber and such as well. Those sorts of things erode the wall between what's official and what's fan-fiction. -- [[User:Shellspark\|Shellspark]] 19:57, 2 March 2012 (EST)		::::::::1. This isn't drama, it's discussion and it's the only way decisions can be made here. 2. This isn't about hatred of a particular fan character either -- I don't know Ursa Magnus from Adam. As I quoted before, this character isn't named, he doesn't do anything of note. The only thing OF note about him is the fact that it's someone's fan-character. At most, it should be a footnote on the comic's page. And for the record, I'm all for deleting the pages for Saber and such as well. Those sorts of things erode the wall between what's official and what's fan-fiction. -- [[User:Shellspark\|Shellspark]] 19:57, 2 March 2012 (EST)
	:::::::::Why are you making us jump through hoops before acknowledging a character in an official comic? "Notability" is not one of our principles with regards to character articles, and we have used many names from outside sources such as creators or scripts ([[Axe (G1)\|Axe]], [[Firster Aid]], [[Bluster]]). Why are characters who existed before being used in an official context an exception? [[Rung]] is a fanfic character. Should we now delete his article because he "erodes the wall between what's official and what's fan-fiction"? [[User:Interrobang\|—Interrobang]] 20:19, 2 March 2012 (EST)		:::::::::Why are you making us jump through hoops before acknowledging a character in an official comic? "Notability" is not one of our principles with regards to character articles, and we have used many names from outside sources such as creators or scripts ([[Axe (G1)\|Axe]], [[Firster Aid]], [[Bluster]]). Why are characters who existed before being used in an official context an exception? [[Rung (G1)\|Rung]] is a fanfic character. Should we now delete his article because he "erodes the wall between what's official and what's fan-fiction"? [[User:Interrobang\|—Interrobang]] 20:19, 2 March 2012 (EST)
	:::::::::I'm not sure it's our job to keep the wall between official and fanfiction from eroding if official creators are making it increasingly difficult for us to do so. The wiki should reflect things as they are, not as what we wish them to be. At that point, we're deciding canon ourselves. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 20:22, 2 March 2012 (EST)		:::::::::I'm not sure it's our job to keep the wall between official and fanfiction from eroding if official creators are making it increasingly difficult for us to do so. The wiki should reflect things as they are, not as what we wish them to be. At that point, we're deciding canon ourselves. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 20:22, 2 March 2012 (EST)

Abates: /* Delete */

2012-03-03T06:12:27Z

Delete

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:12, 3 March 2012
Line 34:		Line 34:
	:::::Also, I don't know what exactly the criteria ''should'' be for when such a character warrants an article of their own, either. But, if [[AlbinoBumbleBee]] and [[Bluster\|a jokey "explanation" Furman made on his blog]] get articles, then it seems the threshold has been set fairly low. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 00:14, 3 March 2012 (EST)		:::::Also, I don't know what exactly the criteria ''should'' be for when such a character warrants an article of their own, either. But, if [[AlbinoBumbleBee]] and [[Bluster\|a jokey "explanation" Furman made on his blog]] get articles, then it seems the threshold has been set fairly low. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 00:14, 3 March 2012 (EST)
	::::::Considering how we have guys like [[Christmas Maximus]], [[Ancient Autobot survivor]], [['70s pimp]], [[Dia Battles Transformer]], [[Bobby Bolivia's mammy]], and many others, I think the established criteria is "if somebody feels like making an article on a character of interest". Excluding pre-existing fan-characters from that is silly. [[User:Interrobang\|—Interrobang]] 00:25, 3 March 2012 (EST)		::::::Considering how we have guys like [[Christmas Maximus]], [[Ancient Autobot survivor]], [['70s pimp]], [[Dia Battles Transformer]], [[Bobby Bolivia's mammy]], and many others, I think the established criteria is "if somebody feels like making an article on a character of interest". Excluding pre-existing fan-characters from that is silly. [[User:Interrobang\|—Interrobang]] 00:25, 3 March 2012 (EST)
			:::::::Yeah, I'm not sure why people seem to have such a big problem with this particular character. I'm in favour of bringing the article back from the dead. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 01:12, 3 March 2012 (EST)

	I feel like this page was prematurely deleted. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 01:09, 3 March 2012 (EST)		I feel like this page was prematurely deleted. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 01:09, 3 March 2012 (EST)

ItsWalky: /* Delete */

2012-03-03T06:09:20Z

Delete

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:09, 3 March 2012
Line 34:		Line 34:
	:::::Also, I don't know what exactly the criteria ''should'' be for when such a character warrants an article of their own, either. But, if [[AlbinoBumbleBee]] and [[Bluster\|a jokey "explanation" Furman made on his blog]] get articles, then it seems the threshold has been set fairly low. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 00:14, 3 March 2012 (EST)		:::::Also, I don't know what exactly the criteria ''should'' be for when such a character warrants an article of their own, either. But, if [[AlbinoBumbleBee]] and [[Bluster\|a jokey "explanation" Furman made on his blog]] get articles, then it seems the threshold has been set fairly low. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 00:14, 3 March 2012 (EST)
	::::::Considering how we have guys like [[Christmas Maximus]], [[Ancient Autobot survivor]], [['70s pimp]], [[Dia Battles Transformer]], [[Bobby Bolivia's mammy]], and many others, I think the established criteria is "if somebody feels like making an article on a character of interest". Excluding pre-existing fan-characters from that is silly. [[User:Interrobang\|—Interrobang]] 00:25, 3 March 2012 (EST)		::::::Considering how we have guys like [[Christmas Maximus]], [[Ancient Autobot survivor]], [['70s pimp]], [[Dia Battles Transformer]], [[Bobby Bolivia's mammy]], and many others, I think the established criteria is "if somebody feels like making an article on a character of interest". Excluding pre-existing fan-characters from that is silly. [[User:Interrobang\|—Interrobang]] 00:25, 3 March 2012 (EST)

			I feel like this page was prematurely deleted. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 01:09, 3 March 2012 (EST)

	== Faction? ==		== Faction? ==

Interrobang: /* Delete */

2012-03-03T05:25:16Z

Delete

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:25, 3 March 2012
Line 33:		Line 33:
	::::The criteria for whether or not any given unnamed background/generic/filler/whatever-type character gets an article should absolutely NOT include "was this guy originally someone's fanfic character?" Because, really, what difference does that make? If a writer or artist creates someone new on the spot to fill some tiny role, they get an article, but if he/she plugs in a character that already existed in their fanfic or their friend's, that's disqualifying? What? I don't see the logic, there. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 23:14, 2 March 2012 (EST)		::::The criteria for whether or not any given unnamed background/generic/filler/whatever-type character gets an article should absolutely NOT include "was this guy originally someone's fanfic character?" Because, really, what difference does that make? If a writer or artist creates someone new on the spot to fill some tiny role, they get an article, but if he/she plugs in a character that already existed in their fanfic or their friend's, that's disqualifying? What? I don't see the logic, there. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 23:14, 2 March 2012 (EST)
	:::::Also, I don't know what exactly the criteria ''should'' be for when such a character warrants an article of their own, either. But, if [[AlbinoBumbleBee]] and [[Bluster\|a jokey "explanation" Furman made on his blog]] get articles, then it seems the threshold has been set fairly low. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 00:14, 3 March 2012 (EST)		:::::Also, I don't know what exactly the criteria ''should'' be for when such a character warrants an article of their own, either. But, if [[AlbinoBumbleBee]] and [[Bluster\|a jokey "explanation" Furman made on his blog]] get articles, then it seems the threshold has been set fairly low. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 00:14, 3 March 2012 (EST)
			::::::Considering how we have guys like [[Christmas Maximus]], [[Ancient Autobot survivor]], [['70s pimp]], [[Dia Battles Transformer]], [[Bobby Bolivia's mammy]], and many others, I think the established criteria is "if somebody feels like making an article on a character of interest". Excluding pre-existing fan-characters from that is silly. [[User:Interrobang\|—Interrobang]] 00:25, 3 March 2012 (EST)

	== Faction? ==		== Faction? ==

KilMichaelMcC: /* Delete */

2012-03-03T05:14:47Z

Delete

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:14, 3 March 2012
Line 32:		Line 32:
	:::There is no difference between any of these background fan-slurp-fic characters. Saying "the author knew but the editor didn't" or whatever is an inherently self-contradictory bit of pointless intentism. If this one goes, they all must. Honestly I saw no problem with Ursa Magnus or for that matter with X-Warlock. --[[User:Thylacine 2000\|Thylacine 2000]] 23:07, 2 March 2012 (EST)		:::There is no difference between any of these background fan-slurp-fic characters. Saying "the author knew but the editor didn't" or whatever is an inherently self-contradictory bit of pointless intentism. If this one goes, they all must. Honestly I saw no problem with Ursa Magnus or for that matter with X-Warlock. --[[User:Thylacine 2000\|Thylacine 2000]] 23:07, 2 March 2012 (EST)
	::::The criteria for whether or not any given unnamed background/generic/filler/whatever-type character gets an article should absolutely NOT include "was this guy originally someone's fanfic character?" Because, really, what difference does that make? If a writer or artist creates someone new on the spot to fill some tiny role, they get an article, but if he/she plugs in a character that already existed in their fanfic or their friend's, that's disqualifying? What? I don't see the logic, there. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 23:14, 2 March 2012 (EST)		::::The criteria for whether or not any given unnamed background/generic/filler/whatever-type character gets an article should absolutely NOT include "was this guy originally someone's fanfic character?" Because, really, what difference does that make? If a writer or artist creates someone new on the spot to fill some tiny role, they get an article, but if he/she plugs in a character that already existed in their fanfic or their friend's, that's disqualifying? What? I don't see the logic, there. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 23:14, 2 March 2012 (EST)
	:::::Also, I don't know what exactly the criteria ''should'' be for when such a character warrants an article of their own ~~should be~~, either. But, if [[AlbinoBumbleBee]] and [[Bluster\|a jokey "explanation" Furman made on his blog]] get articles, then it seems the threshold has been set fairly low. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 00:14, 3 March 2012 (EST)		:::::Also, I don't know what exactly the criteria ''should'' be for when such a character warrants an article of their own, either. But, if [[AlbinoBumbleBee]] and [[Bluster\|a jokey "explanation" Furman made on his blog]] get articles, then it seems the threshold has been set fairly low. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 00:14, 3 March 2012 (EST)

	== Faction? ==		== Faction? ==

KilMichaelMcC: /* Delete */

2012-03-03T05:14:01Z

Delete

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:14, 3 March 2012
Line 32:		Line 32:
	:::There is no difference between any of these background fan-slurp-fic characters. Saying "the author knew but the editor didn't" or whatever is an inherently self-contradictory bit of pointless intentism. If this one goes, they all must. Honestly I saw no problem with Ursa Magnus or for that matter with X-Warlock. --[[User:Thylacine 2000\|Thylacine 2000]] 23:07, 2 March 2012 (EST)		:::There is no difference between any of these background fan-slurp-fic characters. Saying "the author knew but the editor didn't" or whatever is an inherently self-contradictory bit of pointless intentism. If this one goes, they all must. Honestly I saw no problem with Ursa Magnus or for that matter with X-Warlock. --[[User:Thylacine 2000\|Thylacine 2000]] 23:07, 2 March 2012 (EST)
	::::The criteria for whether or not any given unnamed background/generic/filler/whatever-type character gets an article should absolutely NOT include "was this guy originally someone's fanfic character?" Because, really, what difference does that make? If a writer or artist creates someone new on the spot to fill some tiny role, they get an article, but if he/she plugs in a character that already existed in their fanfic or their friend's, that's disqualifying? What? I don't see the logic, there. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 23:14, 2 March 2012 (EST)		::::The criteria for whether or not any given unnamed background/generic/filler/whatever-type character gets an article should absolutely NOT include "was this guy originally someone's fanfic character?" Because, really, what difference does that make? If a writer or artist creates someone new on the spot to fill some tiny role, they get an article, but if he/she plugs in a character that already existed in their fanfic or their friend's, that's disqualifying? What? I don't see the logic, there. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 23:14, 2 March 2012 (EST)
			:::::Also, I don't know what exactly the criteria ''should'' be for when such a character warrants an article of their own should be, either. But, if [[AlbinoBumbleBee]] and [[Bluster\|a jokey "explanation" Furman made on his blog]] get articles, then it seems the threshold has been set fairly low. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 00:14, 3 March 2012 (EST)

	== Faction? ==		== Faction? ==

KilMichaelMcC: /* Delete */

2012-03-03T04:15:05Z

Delete

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:15, 3 March 2012
Line 31:		Line 31:
	::I think Monzo deleted it because Ursa Magnus said above he'd like it deleted. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 23:01, 2 March 2012 (EST)		::I think Monzo deleted it because Ursa Magnus said above he'd like it deleted. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 23:01, 2 March 2012 (EST)
	:::There is no difference between any of these background fan-slurp-fic characters. Saying "the author knew but the editor didn't" or whatever is an inherently self-contradictory bit of pointless intentism. If this one goes, they all must. Honestly I saw no problem with Ursa Magnus or for that matter with X-Warlock. --[[User:Thylacine 2000\|Thylacine 2000]] 23:07, 2 March 2012 (EST)		:::There is no difference between any of these background fan-slurp-fic characters. Saying "the author knew but the editor didn't" or whatever is an inherently self-contradictory bit of pointless intentism. If this one goes, they all must. Honestly I saw no problem with Ursa Magnus or for that matter with X-Warlock. --[[User:Thylacine 2000\|Thylacine 2000]] 23:07, 2 March 2012 (EST)
	~~----~~
	::::The criteria for whether or not any given unnamed background/generic/filler/whatever-type character gets an article should absolutely NOT include "was this guy originally someone's fanfic character?" Because, really, what difference does that make? If a writer or artist creates someone new on the spot to fill some tiny role, they get an article, but if he/she plugs in a character that already existed in their fanfic or their friend's, that's disqualifying? What? I don't see the logic, there. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 23:14, 2 March 2012 (EST)		::::The criteria for whether or not any given unnamed background/generic/filler/whatever-type character gets an article should absolutely NOT include "was this guy originally someone's fanfic character?" Because, really, what difference does that make? If a writer or artist creates someone new on the spot to fill some tiny role, they get an article, but if he/she plugs in a character that already existed in their fanfic or their friend's, that's disqualifying? What? I don't see the logic, there. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 23:14, 2 March 2012 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:39, 9 November 2018
Line 33:		Line 33:
	::::The criteria for whether or not any given unnamed background/generic/filler/whatever-type character gets an article should absolutely NOT include "was this guy originally someone's fanfic character?" Because, really, what difference does that make? If a writer or artist creates someone new on the spot to fill some tiny role, they get an article, but if he/she plugs in a character that already existed in their fanfic or their friend's, that's disqualifying? What? I don't see the logic, there. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 23:14, 2 March 2012 (EST)		::::The criteria for whether or not any given unnamed background/generic/filler/whatever-type character gets an article should absolutely NOT include "was this guy originally someone's fanfic character?" Because, really, what difference does that make? If a writer or artist creates someone new on the spot to fill some tiny role, they get an article, but if he/she plugs in a character that already existed in their fanfic or their friend's, that's disqualifying? What? I don't see the logic, there. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 23:14, 2 March 2012 (EST)
	:::::Also, I don't know what exactly the criteria ''should'' be for when such a character warrants an article of their own, either. But, if [[AlbinoBumbleBee]] and [[Bluster\|a jokey "explanation" Furman made on his blog]] get articles, then it seems the threshold has been set fairly low. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 00:14, 3 March 2012 (EST)		:::::Also, I don't know what exactly the criteria ''should'' be for when such a character warrants an article of their own, either. But, if [[AlbinoBumbleBee]] and [[Bluster\|a jokey "explanation" Furman made on his blog]] get articles, then it seems the threshold has been set fairly low. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 00:14, 3 March 2012 (EST)
	::::::Considering how we have guys like [[Christmas Maximus]], [[Ancient Autobot survivor]], [['70s pimp]], [[Stormbringer\|Dia Battles Transformer]], [[Bobby Bolivia's mammy]], and many others, I think the established criteria is "if somebody feels like making an article on a character of interest". Excluding pre-existing fan-characters from that is silly. [[User:Interrobang\|—Interrobang]] 00:25, 3 March 2012 (EST)		::::::Considering how we have guys like [[Peritus Maximus\|Christmas Maximus]], [[Ancient Autobot survivor]], [['70s pimp]], [[Stormbringer\|Dia Battles Transformer]], [[Bobby Bolivia's mammy]], and many others, I think the established criteria is "if somebody feels like making an article on a character of interest". Excluding pre-existing fan-characters from that is silly. [[User:Interrobang\|—Interrobang]] 00:25, 3 March 2012 (EST)
	:::::::Yeah, I'm not sure why people seem to have such a big problem with this particular character. I'm in favour of bringing the article back from the dead. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 01:12, 3 March 2012 (EST)		:::::::Yeah, I'm not sure why people seem to have such a big problem with this particular character. I'm in favour of bringing the article back from the dead. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 01:12, 3 March 2012 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:09, 17 September 2015
Line 33:		Line 33:
	::::The criteria for whether or not any given unnamed background/generic/filler/whatever-type character gets an article should absolutely NOT include "was this guy originally someone's fanfic character?" Because, really, what difference does that make? If a writer or artist creates someone new on the spot to fill some tiny role, they get an article, but if he/she plugs in a character that already existed in their fanfic or their friend's, that's disqualifying? What? I don't see the logic, there. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 23:14, 2 March 2012 (EST)		::::The criteria for whether or not any given unnamed background/generic/filler/whatever-type character gets an article should absolutely NOT include "was this guy originally someone's fanfic character?" Because, really, what difference does that make? If a writer or artist creates someone new on the spot to fill some tiny role, they get an article, but if he/she plugs in a character that already existed in their fanfic or their friend's, that's disqualifying? What? I don't see the logic, there. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 23:14, 2 March 2012 (EST)
	:::::Also, I don't know what exactly the criteria ''should'' be for when such a character warrants an article of their own, either. But, if [[AlbinoBumbleBee]] and [[Bluster\|a jokey "explanation" Furman made on his blog]] get articles, then it seems the threshold has been set fairly low. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 00:14, 3 March 2012 (EST)		:::::Also, I don't know what exactly the criteria ''should'' be for when such a character warrants an article of their own, either. But, if [[AlbinoBumbleBee]] and [[Bluster\|a jokey "explanation" Furman made on his blog]] get articles, then it seems the threshold has been set fairly low. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 00:14, 3 March 2012 (EST)
	::::::Considering how we have guys like [[Christmas Maximus]], [[Ancient Autobot survivor]], [['70s pimp]], [[Dia Battles Transformer]], [[Bobby Bolivia's mammy]], and many others, I think the established criteria is "if somebody feels like making an article on a character of interest". Excluding pre-existing fan-characters from that is silly. [[User:Interrobang\|—Interrobang]] 00:25, 3 March 2012 (EST)		::::::Considering how we have guys like [[Christmas Maximus]], [[Ancient Autobot survivor]], [['70s pimp]], [[Stormbringer\|Dia Battles Transformer]], [[Bobby Bolivia's mammy]], and many others, I think the established criteria is "if somebody feels like making an article on a character of interest". Excluding pre-existing fan-characters from that is silly. [[User:Interrobang\|—Interrobang]] 00:25, 3 March 2012 (EST)
	:::::::Yeah, I'm not sure why people seem to have such a big problem with this particular character. I'm in favour of bringing the article back from the dead. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 01:12, 3 March 2012 (EST)		:::::::Yeah, I'm not sure why people seem to have such a big problem with this particular character. I'm in favour of bringing the article back from the dead. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 01:12, 3 March 2012 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:02, 8 February 2014
Line 24:		Line 24:
	:::::::I'm not sure why you think those precedents need to be avoided, Monzo. [[User:Interrobang\|—Interrobang]] 18:33, 2 March 2012 (EST)		:::::::I'm not sure why you think those precedents need to be avoided, Monzo. [[User:Interrobang\|—Interrobang]] 18:33, 2 March 2012 (EST)
	::::::::1. This isn't drama, it's discussion and it's the only way decisions can be made here. 2. This isn't about hatred of a particular fan character either -- I don't know Ursa Magnus from Adam. As I quoted before, this character isn't named, he doesn't do anything of note. The only thing OF note about him is the fact that it's someone's fan-character. At most, it should be a footnote on the comic's page. And for the record, I'm all for deleting the pages for Saber and such as well. Those sorts of things erode the wall between what's official and what's fan-fiction. -- [[User:Shellspark\|Shellspark]] 19:57, 2 March 2012 (EST)		::::::::1. This isn't drama, it's discussion and it's the only way decisions can be made here. 2. This isn't about hatred of a particular fan character either -- I don't know Ursa Magnus from Adam. As I quoted before, this character isn't named, he doesn't do anything of note. The only thing OF note about him is the fact that it's someone's fan-character. At most, it should be a footnote on the comic's page. And for the record, I'm all for deleting the pages for Saber and such as well. Those sorts of things erode the wall between what's official and what's fan-fiction. -- [[User:Shellspark\|Shellspark]] 19:57, 2 March 2012 (EST)
	:::::::::Why are you making us jump through hoops before acknowledging a character in an official comic? "Notability" is not one of our principles with regards to character articles, and we have used many names from outside sources such as creators or scripts ([[Axe (G1)\|Axe]], [[Firster Aid]], [[Bluster]]). Why are characters who existed before being used in an official context an exception? [[Rung]] is a fanfic character. Should we now delete his article because he "erodes the wall between what's official and what's fan-fiction"? [[User:Interrobang\|—Interrobang]] 20:19, 2 March 2012 (EST)		:::::::::Why are you making us jump through hoops before acknowledging a character in an official comic? "Notability" is not one of our principles with regards to character articles, and we have used many names from outside sources such as creators or scripts ([[Axe (G1)\|Axe]], [[Firster Aid]], [[Bluster]]). Why are characters who existed before being used in an official context an exception? [[Rung (G1)\|Rung]] is a fanfic character. Should we now delete his article because he "erodes the wall between what's official and what's fan-fiction"? [[User:Interrobang\|—Interrobang]] 20:19, 2 March 2012 (EST)
	:::::::::I'm not sure it's our job to keep the wall between official and fanfiction from eroding if official creators are making it increasingly difficult for us to do so. The wiki should reflect things as they are, not as what we wish them to be. At that point, we're deciding canon ourselves. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 20:22, 2 March 2012 (EST)		:::::::::I'm not sure it's our job to keep the wall between official and fanfiction from eroding if official creators are making it increasingly difficult for us to do so. The wiki should reflect things as they are, not as what we wish them to be. At that point, we're deciding canon ourselves. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 20:22, 2 March 2012 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:12, 3 March 2012
Line 34:		Line 34:
	:::::Also, I don't know what exactly the criteria ''should'' be for when such a character warrants an article of their own, either. But, if [[AlbinoBumbleBee]] and [[Bluster\|a jokey "explanation" Furman made on his blog]] get articles, then it seems the threshold has been set fairly low. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 00:14, 3 March 2012 (EST)		:::::Also, I don't know what exactly the criteria ''should'' be for when such a character warrants an article of their own, either. But, if [[AlbinoBumbleBee]] and [[Bluster\|a jokey "explanation" Furman made on his blog]] get articles, then it seems the threshold has been set fairly low. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 00:14, 3 March 2012 (EST)
	::::::Considering how we have guys like [[Christmas Maximus]], [[Ancient Autobot survivor]], [['70s pimp]], [[Dia Battles Transformer]], [[Bobby Bolivia's mammy]], and many others, I think the established criteria is "if somebody feels like making an article on a character of interest". Excluding pre-existing fan-characters from that is silly. [[User:Interrobang\|—Interrobang]] 00:25, 3 March 2012 (EST)		::::::Considering how we have guys like [[Christmas Maximus]], [[Ancient Autobot survivor]], [['70s pimp]], [[Dia Battles Transformer]], [[Bobby Bolivia's mammy]], and many others, I think the established criteria is "if somebody feels like making an article on a character of interest". Excluding pre-existing fan-characters from that is silly. [[User:Interrobang\|—Interrobang]] 00:25, 3 March 2012 (EST)
			:::::::Yeah, I'm not sure why people seem to have such a big problem with this particular character. I'm in favour of bringing the article back from the dead. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 01:12, 3 March 2012 (EST)

	I feel like this page was prematurely deleted. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 01:09, 3 March 2012 (EST)		I feel like this page was prematurely deleted. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 01:09, 3 March 2012 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:15, 3 March 2012
Line 31:		Line 31:
	::I think Monzo deleted it because Ursa Magnus said above he'd like it deleted. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 23:01, 2 March 2012 (EST)		::I think Monzo deleted it because Ursa Magnus said above he'd like it deleted. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 23:01, 2 March 2012 (EST)
	:::There is no difference between any of these background fan-slurp-fic characters. Saying "the author knew but the editor didn't" or whatever is an inherently self-contradictory bit of pointless intentism. If this one goes, they all must. Honestly I saw no problem with Ursa Magnus or for that matter with X-Warlock. --[[User:Thylacine 2000\|Thylacine 2000]] 23:07, 2 March 2012 (EST)		:::There is no difference between any of these background fan-slurp-fic characters. Saying "the author knew but the editor didn't" or whatever is an inherently self-contradictory bit of pointless intentism. If this one goes, they all must. Honestly I saw no problem with Ursa Magnus or for that matter with X-Warlock. --[[User:Thylacine 2000\|Thylacine 2000]] 23:07, 2 March 2012 (EST)
	~~----~~
	::::The criteria for whether or not any given unnamed background/generic/filler/whatever-type character gets an article should absolutely NOT include "was this guy originally someone's fanfic character?" Because, really, what difference does that make? If a writer or artist creates someone new on the spot to fill some tiny role, they get an article, but if he/she plugs in a character that already existed in their fanfic or their friend's, that's disqualifying? What? I don't see the logic, there. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 23:14, 2 March 2012 (EST)		::::The criteria for whether or not any given unnamed background/generic/filler/whatever-type character gets an article should absolutely NOT include "was this guy originally someone's fanfic character?" Because, really, what difference does that make? If a writer or artist creates someone new on the spot to fill some tiny role, they get an article, but if he/she plugs in a character that already existed in their fanfic or their friend's, that's disqualifying? What? I don't see the logic, there. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 23:14, 2 March 2012 (EST)