Talk:Windblade (RID) - Revision history

Galvatrancis at 22:22, 6 June 2022

2022-06-06T22:22:52Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:22, 6 June 2022
Line 11:		Line 11:
	==Screen Grabs==		==Screen Grabs==
	Isn't this kinda overkill? There's a solid column of images on both sides of the text in the cartoon writeup. We could pretty easily lose a few of these... keep the altmode, pre-armor, the ones of her in camo, those are important enough... and the John Woo one because that's awesome. --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 21:25, 1 January 2018 (EST)		Isn't this kinda overkill? There's a solid column of images on both sides of the text in the cartoon writeup. We could pretty easily lose a few of these... keep the altmode, pre-armor, the ones of her in camo, those are important enough... and the John Woo one because that's awesome. --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 21:25, 1 January 2018 (EST)

	~~== New information: ==~~

	~~Shouldnt we put the fact that originally, ironhide was in windblades place during production ? I heard this in the TFW2005 borders lol~~

Galvatrancis: /* New information: */ new section

2022-06-06T22:17:45Z

New information:: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:17, 6 June 2022
Line 11:		Line 11:
	==Screen Grabs==		==Screen Grabs==
	Isn't this kinda overkill? There's a solid column of images on both sides of the text in the cartoon writeup. We could pretty easily lose a few of these... keep the altmode, pre-armor, the ones of her in camo, those are important enough... and the John Woo one because that's awesome. --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 21:25, 1 January 2018 (EST)		Isn't this kinda overkill? There's a solid column of images on both sides of the text in the cartoon writeup. We could pretty easily lose a few of these... keep the altmode, pre-armor, the ones of her in camo, those are important enough... and the John Woo one because that's awesome. --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 21:25, 1 January 2018 (EST)

			== New information: ==

			Shouldnt we put the fact that originally, ironhide was in windblades place during production ? I heard this in the TFW2005 borders lol

M Sipher: There's too many images in the cartoon writeup...

2018-01-02T02:25:21Z

There's too many images in the cartoon writeup...

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:25, 2 January 2018
Line 8:		Line 8:
	====Hasbro vs TakaraTomy versions====		====Hasbro vs TakaraTomy versions====
	This is possibly a dumb question, but how is the decision about how to list the Hasbro and TakaraTomy versions of toys made? For example, on [[Windblade (RID)#Toys\|this page]] the 2016 Warrior Class figure includes both the US and Japanese versions in the same entry, including Japanese ID number, some disambiguation ("The TakaraTomy version of the figure has more paint applications...") with dual photos. The Japanese release was presumably under the ''Adventure'' branding, rather than ''Robots in Disguise''. On the other hand, the Legion Class figures are listed separately with the Cyberverse Legion becoming the only one listed under the ''Adventure'' brand. Is it the extent of the redeco, or the ''Adventure'' Legion being part of a set? For [[Windblade (G1)\|G1 Windblade]], the Generations and Legends releases are separate, while for [[Grimlock (RID 2015)\|RID (2015) Grimlock]], they're combined (leaving aside the ''Adventure''-specific Voyager). I'm just not picking up the rationale here. [[User:TGB\|TGB]] ([[User talk:TGB\|talk]]) 07:59, 6 June 2017 (EDT)		This is possibly a dumb question, but how is the decision about how to list the Hasbro and TakaraTomy versions of toys made? For example, on [[Windblade (RID)#Toys\|this page]] the 2016 Warrior Class figure includes both the US and Japanese versions in the same entry, including Japanese ID number, some disambiguation ("The TakaraTomy version of the figure has more paint applications...") with dual photos. The Japanese release was presumably under the ''Adventure'' branding, rather than ''Robots in Disguise''. On the other hand, the Legion Class figures are listed separately with the Cyberverse Legion becoming the only one listed under the ''Adventure'' brand. Is it the extent of the redeco, or the ''Adventure'' Legion being part of a set? For [[Windblade (G1)\|G1 Windblade]], the Generations and Legends releases are separate, while for [[Grimlock (RID 2015)\|RID (2015) Grimlock]], they're combined (leaving aside the ''Adventure''-specific Voyager). I'm just not picking up the rationale here. [[User:TGB\|TGB]] ([[User talk:TGB\|talk]]) 07:59, 6 June 2017 (EDT)

			==Screen Grabs==
			Isn't this kinda overkill? There's a solid column of images on both sides of the text in the cartoon writeup. We could pretty easily lose a few of these... keep the altmode, pre-armor, the ones of her in camo, those are important enough... and the John Woo one because that's awesome. --[[User:M Sipher\|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher\|talk]]) 21:25, 1 January 2018 (EST)

TGB at 12:01, 6 June 2017

2017-06-06T12:01:42Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:01, 6 June 2017
Line 7:		Line 7:

	====Hasbro vs TakaraTomy versions====		====Hasbro vs TakaraTomy versions====
	This is possibly a dumb question, but how is the decision about how to list the Hasbro and TakaraTomy versions made? For example, on this page the 2016 Warrior Class figure includes both the US and Japanese versions in the same entry, including Japanese ID number, some disambiguation ("The TakaraTomy version of the figure has more paint applications...") with dual photos. The Japanese release was presumably under the ''Adventure'' branding, rather than ''Robots in Disguise''. On the other hand, the Legion Class figures are listed separately with the Cyberverse Legion becoming the only one listed under the ''Adventure'' brand. Is it the extent of the redeco, or the ''Adventure'' Legion being part of a set? For [[Windblade (G1)\|G1 Windblade]], the Generations and Legends releases are separate, while for [[Grimlock (RID 2015)\|RID (2015) Grimlock]], they're combined (leaving aside the ''Adventure''-specific Voyager). I'm just not picking up the rationale here. [[User:TGB\|TGB]] ([[User talk:TGB\|talk]]) 07:59, 6 June 2017 (EDT)		This is possibly a dumb question, but how is the decision about how to list the Hasbro and TakaraTomy versions of toys made? For example, on [[Windblade (RID)#Toys\|this page]] the 2016 Warrior Class figure includes both the US and Japanese versions in the same entry, including Japanese ID number, some disambiguation ("The TakaraTomy version of the figure has more paint applications...") with dual photos. The Japanese release was presumably under the ''Adventure'' branding, rather than ''Robots in Disguise''. On the other hand, the Legion Class figures are listed separately with the Cyberverse Legion becoming the only one listed under the ''Adventure'' brand. Is it the extent of the redeco, or the ''Adventure'' Legion being part of a set? For [[Windblade (G1)\|G1 Windblade]], the Generations and Legends releases are separate, while for [[Grimlock (RID 2015)\|RID (2015) Grimlock]], they're combined (leaving aside the ''Adventure''-specific Voyager). I'm just not picking up the rationale here. [[User:TGB\|TGB]] ([[User talk:TGB\|talk]]) 07:59, 6 June 2017 (EDT)

TGB at 12:00, 6 June 2017

2017-06-06T12:00:28Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:00, 6 June 2017
Line 7:		Line 7:

	====Hasbro vs TakaraTomy versions====		====Hasbro vs TakaraTomy versions====
	This is possibly a dumb question, but how is the decision about how to list the Hasbro and TakaraTomy versions made? For example, on this page the 2016 Warrior Class figure includes both the US and Japanese versions in the same entry, including Japanese ID number, some disambiguation ("The TakaraTomy version of the figure has more paint applications...") with dual photos. The Japanese release was presumably under the ''Adventure'' branding, rather than ''Robots in Disguise''. On the other hand, the Legion Class figures are listed separately with the Cyberverse Legion becoming the only one listed under the ''Adventure'' brand. Is it the extent of the redeco, or the ''Adventure'' Legion being part of a set? For [[Windblade (G1)\|G1 Windblade]], the Generations and Legends releases are separate, while for [[Grimlock (RID 2015)\|RID (2015) Grimlock]], they're combined. I'm just not picking up the rationale here. [[User:TGB\|TGB]] ([[User talk:TGB\|talk]]) 07:59, 6 June 2017 (EDT)		This is possibly a dumb question, but how is the decision about how to list the Hasbro and TakaraTomy versions made? For example, on this page the 2016 Warrior Class figure includes both the US and Japanese versions in the same entry, including Japanese ID number, some disambiguation ("The TakaraTomy version of the figure has more paint applications...") with dual photos. The Japanese release was presumably under the ''Adventure'' branding, rather than ''Robots in Disguise''. On the other hand, the Legion Class figures are listed separately with the Cyberverse Legion becoming the only one listed under the ''Adventure'' brand. Is it the extent of the redeco, or the ''Adventure'' Legion being part of a set? For [[Windblade (G1)\|G1 Windblade]], the Generations and Legends releases are separate, while for [[Grimlock (RID 2015)\|RID (2015) Grimlock]], they're combined (leaving aside the ''Adventure''-specific Voyager). I'm just not picking up the rationale here. [[User:TGB\|TGB]] ([[User talk:TGB\|talk]]) 07:59, 6 June 2017 (EDT)

TGB at 11:59, 6 June 2017

2017-06-06T11:59:27Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:59, 6 June 2017
Line 5:		Line 5:

	::But the difference is that Windblade's Generations toy was sold as her G1 incarnation, with G1 pack-in fiction, long before she was announced as a RID character. All the RID toys with differences from their characters were still being sold specifically as those characters. So for her Generations toy to be listed here, it'd have to be counted as a repurposing, and her show design is way too divergent for that - they have similar builds, altmodes, transformations, colours and head designs, but almost all the details are completely different. [[User:Riptide\|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide\|talk]]) 10:17, 28 April 2015 (EDT)		::But the difference is that Windblade's Generations toy was sold as her G1 incarnation, with G1 pack-in fiction, long before she was announced as a RID character. All the RID toys with differences from their characters were still being sold specifically as those characters. So for her Generations toy to be listed here, it'd have to be counted as a repurposing, and her show design is way too divergent for that - they have similar builds, altmodes, transformations, colours and head designs, but almost all the details are completely different. [[User:Riptide\|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide\|talk]]) 10:17, 28 April 2015 (EDT)

			====Hasbro vs TakaraTomy versions====
			This is possibly a dumb question, but how is the decision about how to list the Hasbro and TakaraTomy versions made? For example, on this page the 2016 Warrior Class figure includes both the US and Japanese versions in the same entry, including Japanese ID number, some disambiguation ("The TakaraTomy version of the figure has more paint applications...") with dual photos. The Japanese release was presumably under the ''Adventure'' branding, rather than ''Robots in Disguise''. On the other hand, the Legion Class figures are listed separately with the Cyberverse Legion becoming the only one listed under the ''Adventure'' brand. Is it the extent of the redeco, or the ''Adventure'' Legion being part of a set? For [[Windblade (G1)\|G1 Windblade]], the Generations and Legends releases are separate, while for [[Grimlock (RID 2015)\|RID (2015) Grimlock]], they're combined. I'm just not picking up the rationale here. [[User:TGB\|TGB]] ([[User talk:TGB\|talk]]) 07:59, 6 June 2017 (EDT)

Broadside at 14:17, 28 April 2015

2015-04-28T14:17:37Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:17, 28 April 2015
Line 3:		Line 3:
	No - it's a similar design but nowhere near similar enough to count as a repurposing. She'll probably get her own RID toys eventually, anyway. [[User:Riptide\|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide\|talk]]) 06:02, 26 April 2015 (EDT)		No - it's a similar design but nowhere near similar enough to count as a repurposing. She'll probably get her own RID toys eventually, anyway. [[User:Riptide\|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide\|talk]]) 06:02, 26 April 2015 (EDT)
	:I don't know, to me it seems as similar to her show model as many of the RID toys do... --[[User:Abates\|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates\|talk]]) 03:02, 28 April 2015 (EDT)		:I don't know, to me it seems as similar to her show model as many of the RID toys do... --[[User:Abates\|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates\|talk]]) 03:02, 28 April 2015 (EDT)

			::But the difference is that Windblade's Generations toy was sold as her G1 incarnation, with G1 pack-in fiction, long before she was announced as a RID character. All the RID toys with differences from their characters were still being sold specifically as those characters. So for her Generations toy to be listed here, it'd have to be counted as a repurposing, and her show design is way too divergent for that - they have similar builds, altmodes, transformations, colours and head designs, but almost all the details are completely different. [[User:Riptide\|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide\|talk]]) 10:17, 28 April 2015 (EDT)

Abates at 07:02, 28 April 2015

2015-04-28T07:02:10Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:02, 28 April 2015
Line 2:		Line 2:

	No - it's a similar design but nowhere near similar enough to count as a repurposing. She'll probably get her own RID toys eventually, anyway. [[User:Riptide\|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide\|talk]]) 06:02, 26 April 2015 (EDT)		No - it's a similar design but nowhere near similar enough to count as a repurposing. She'll probably get her own RID toys eventually, anyway. [[User:Riptide\|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide\|talk]]) 06:02, 26 April 2015 (EDT)
			:I don't know, to me it seems as similar to her show model as many of the RID toys do... --[[User:Abates\|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates\|talk]]) 03:02, 28 April 2015 (EDT)

Broadside at 10:02, 26 April 2015

2015-04-26T10:02:06Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:02, 26 April 2015
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Since this Windblade's pretty clearly based on the same design as the toy, the Generations toy should be listed on this page, shouldn't it? --[[User:Abates\|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates\|talk]]) 04:20, 26 April 2015 (EDT)		Since this Windblade's pretty clearly based on the same design as the toy, the Generations toy should be listed on this page, shouldn't it? --[[User:Abates\|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates\|talk]]) 04:20, 26 April 2015 (EDT)

			No - it's a similar design but nowhere near similar enough to count as a repurposing. She'll probably get her own RID toys eventually, anyway. [[User:Riptide\|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide\|talk]]) 06:02, 26 April 2015 (EDT)

Abates: Created page with "Since this Windblade's pretty clearly based on the same design as the toy, the Generations toy should be listed on this page, shouldn't it? --~~~~"

2015-04-26T08:20:50Z

Created page with "Since this Windblade's pretty clearly based on the same design as the toy, the Generations toy should be listed on this page, shouldn't it? --~~~~"

New page

Since this Windblade's pretty clearly based on the same design as the toy, the Generations toy should be listed on this page, shouldn't it? --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 04:20, 26 April 2015 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:17, 28 April 2015
Line 3:		Line 3:
	No - it's a similar design but nowhere near similar enough to count as a repurposing. She'll probably get her own RID toys eventually, anyway. [[User:Riptide\|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide\|talk]]) 06:02, 26 April 2015 (EDT)		No - it's a similar design but nowhere near similar enough to count as a repurposing. She'll probably get her own RID toys eventually, anyway. [[User:Riptide\|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide\|talk]]) 06:02, 26 April 2015 (EDT)
	:I don't know, to me it seems as similar to her show model as many of the RID toys do... --[[User:Abates\|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates\|talk]]) 03:02, 28 April 2015 (EDT)		:I don't know, to me it seems as similar to her show model as many of the RID toys do... --[[User:Abates\|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates\|talk]]) 03:02, 28 April 2015 (EDT)

			::But the difference is that Windblade's Generations toy was sold as her G1 incarnation, with G1 pack-in fiction, long before she was announced as a RID character. All the RID toys with differences from their characters were still being sold specifically as those characters. So for her Generations toy to be listed here, it'd have to be counted as a repurposing, and her show design is way too divergent for that - they have similar builds, altmodes, transformations, colours and head designs, but almost all the details are completely different. [[User:Riptide\|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide\|talk]]) 10:17, 28 April 2015 (EDT)