MediaWiki talk:Community Portal: Difference between revisions

From MediaWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Giggidy (talk | contribs)
IGEBM13 (talk | contribs)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
__NEWSECTIONLINK__
__NEWSECTIONLINK__


This is the place for discussion of topics that affect the entire wiki. Some topics that would ordinarily be here have merited their own pages:
This is the place for discussion of topics that affect the entire wiki. For less wide-reaching subjects, either use articles' individual talk pages or [https://discord.com/invite/N99Bygq our Discord server.]
 
Some topics that would ordinarily be here have merited their own pages:


{{chapters|title=Specific Discussion Subjects|align=left|content=
{{chapters|title=Specific Discussion Subjects|align=left|content=
Line 23: Line 25:
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/GoBots|Discussion on the place of GoBots in this wiki]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/GoBots|Discussion on the place of GoBots in this wiki]]
<br/> <div class="list-header">'''Wiki Technical Information:'''</div>
<br/> <div class="list-header">'''Wiki Technical Information:'''</div>
* [[Transformers_Wiki:Tech|A Not So Brief Summary of the Horrible Things That McFly and Co. Have Done To Keep This Wiki From Melting Down]]
* [[Transformers Wiki:Tech|A Not So Brief Summary of the Horrible Things That McFly and Co. Have Done To Keep This Wiki From Melting Down]]
}}<br/>
}}<br/>
<!--BEGIN ARCHIVE NAV INCLUDE-->
<!--BEGIN ARCHIVE NAV INCLUDE-->
Line 30: Line 32:




==Disambig page visual menus==
== Binder of Revelation Illustration Credits ==
In the interests of making this wiki more friendly for people NOT well-versed in micro-continuity and canon pedantry...<br>
Okay, don't kill me here, I'm just hoping that the artists who contributed to the Binder fifteen-ish years ago get their proper due since it's out in the open now. I got in touch with the art director of the Binder of Revelation and have a fairly complete list of credits for who did what illustration.  Since this isn't actually a published work, how do we go about giving proper illustration credits?  Do we even credit anyone?  Considering the document itself has no credits, I feel like it's worthwhile that the artists get recognized, even if we aren't putting any images up ourselves. [[User:MCRG|MCRG]] ([[User talk:MCRG|talk]]) 21:37, 25 November 2025 (EST)
I'm thinking that for the bigger disambig lists for major characters, your Optimusses and Bumblebees and whatnot, under the main text list we have a "gallery" of the various major iterations of those characters in their most publicly-recognizable form, with the images linking to the relevant pages. So it wouldn't have EVERY Optimus Prime, just say G1, RID, Armada, Animated, movie, Prime/RID (perhaps simple collages for characters who change bodies in sequel series). It'd help counter some of this (WFC) and whatnot since kids would, say, know Grimlock from RID 2015 more than some game from however many years ago.<br>
:I don't think this is objectionable info to note at the least. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 23:03, 25 November 2025 (EST)
The "not to be confused with"s can go under that. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 13:52, 10 May 2015 (EDT)
::For now, maybe put your raw info on a sandbox so we can get a better sense of it? Most of the Binder art I know of was by Ken Christiansen, for instance, so if all but a few pieces are by him, it would seem silly to list them all individually. But I'm guessing it's more varied than that. —[[User:The Wadapan|wadapan]] ([[User talk:The Wadapan|talk]]) 00:26, 26 November 2025 (EST)
:Ooh, yes, that's a good idea. [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]]) 14:17, 10 May 2015 (EDT)
:::It's a pretty wide spread, surprisingly.  A lot of the pieces are tag team works where Eric Siebenaler did roughs and other artists did the finals, but it's around 5-10 artists without me checking the exact notes at the momentI'll start getting that together.[[User:MCRG|MCRG]] ([[User talk:MCRG|talk]]) 14:41, 26 November 2025 (EST)
::Thirded.--[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 14:19, 10 May 2015 (EDT)
::::All known credits added. On a side note, is it worth pointing out somewhere that the Binder itself is written in the style of a RPG manual instead of an actual franchise bible? It goes a long way in explaining why it was so quickly disregarded by other creative teams when comparing it to bibles from other franchises or just other series bibles within Transformers on the whole, and the pricetag attached to the project.--[[User:MCRG|MCRG]] ([[User talk:MCRG|talk]]) 15:23, 21 January 2026 (EST)
:::Hell, I'd go so far as to put the image version on the TOP, considering the size of some of the disambig lists. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 14:21, 10 May 2015 (EDT)
::::Gallery goes at the top, nitty-gritty goes at the bottom--[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 14:37, 10 May 2015 (EDT)
:::::Like how [http://marvel.wikia.com/Spider-Man Marvel Database] does it? [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 15:10, 10 May 2015 (EDT)
::::::I'd like to think we could come up with something better-looking than that particular bit of Wikia coding, but this seems like a great idea. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 16:47, 10 May 2015 (EDT)
[[User:M Sipher/Sandbox|I took a simple whack at it with a Gallery setup.]] Nothing fancy, but I think it gets the point across. The final version would probably mix Prime and RID15 Optimus into a single image. <br>Also, Optimus's disambig page needs some major cleanup to become readable. Those sub-sections are an eyesore. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 18:18, 10 May 2015 (EDT)
:Already looking much more user friendly. Great idea, well executed. My one suggestion is that you'd probably be better off using a movie screen capture for the movie version. Something like this: [http://s203.photobucket.com/user/leingang_math/media/optimus.png.html]--[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 19:07, 10 May 2015 (EDT)
::Well yeah, I wanted to, but I was just using whatever was immediately on-hand for example purposes, and movie OP's page is bizarrely bereft of actual full-body CG renders that'd make decent main images. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 19:12, 10 May 2015 (EDT)
:I did a little edit as a suggested way of condensing the sub-sections. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 19:29, 10 May 2015 (EDT)
I like this decision, but how do we decide which versions of the character make it to the top? For instance, would Shattered Glass Optimus Prime be considered noteworthy, since he has multiple toys and fictional appearances? [[User:Grum|Grum]] ([[User talk:Grum|talk]]) 19:33, 10 May 2015 (EDT)
:Pretty much nothing Club-originated would qualify. I say this as someone who produced a ''lot'' of fiction for the Club, but I would not call any of that "major" in relation to the six up there now. If it's not major-mass-market, it shouldn't really go up there. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 19:37, 10 May 2015 (EDT)
::Yeah, I think it's a fairly easy division to make - just do it for the main headliner franchises. G1/BW/BM/RID/UT/Movies/Animated/Prime/RID 2015. For characters of Optimus-level scope, anyway. When it's a disambig page containing only versions of a character from... I dunno, Universe and Timelines, then, sure, whatever. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 19:39, 10 May 2015 (EDT)
:::Well, once you're down that far in the list of importance, not sure we'd bother with a gallery. Though I'm sure there's SOME name that's used often enough to form a long list, but rarely/never in major media to maybe justify Gallery-ing... --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 19:49, 10 May 2015 (EDT)
So how many incarnations of a character do there need to be before they get a gallery? [[User:BT383|BT383]] ([[User talk:BT383|talk]]) 06:28, 16 May 2015 (EDT)
 
I've done a fair few of these now and I think we're down to a few borderline cases - guys like [[Grindor (disambiguation)|Grindor]] (UT/ROTF), [[Hightower (disambiguation)|Hightower]] (RID/ROTF), maybe [[Leadfoot (disambiguation)|Leadfoot]] (G2/DOTM) or [[Overload (disambiguation)|Overload]] (UT/ROTF) and [[Sideways (disambiguation)|Sideways]] (who may or may not be the same guy anyway). Otherwise, I'm pretty sure we've covered all the major players. --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] ([[User talk:Emvee|talk]]) 09:11, 10 June 2015 (EDT)
 
== Movie pages ==
 
I've been looking at the pages for the Movie characters that are in the film. and they are really all over the place in organization. Is there anyway we can organize at least the dudes in the film so it read coherently? I feel like McFeely had some sort of sandbox for it. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 15:15, 12 May 2015 (EDT)
:I think I did at one point. My thought was, if I recall, to essentially ditch the attempt at presenting the pages as a continuous narrative, and make complete , uninterrupted sections out of the Movies, the IDW comics and the Titan comics. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 15:41, 12 May 2015 (EDT)
::I certainly wouldn't be opposed to that. The 'chronological order' thing works well enough for Aligned pages where everything does more or less line up in order, but yeah, it's pretty much a lost cause for the film characters. [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]]) 16:06, 12 May 2015 (EDT)
:::And shit, I think I was suggesting that before ''Dark of the Moon'' was even a thing! - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 16:08, 12 May 2015 (EDT)
::::Yeah, I found the article in question, and ROTF is still saying the to be added when it comes thing. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 16:18, 12 May 2015 (EDT)
:::::[[User:Chris_McFeely/ROTF_proposal|Here is that page]]. Wow, this was ''aaages'' ago. I don't even know where to start with a new one - I mean I think our movie sections are pretty grossly over-written as it is, like, no way does Optimus's role in the first movie take nine paragraphs to sum up. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 17:37, 12 May 2015 (EDT)
::::::Gave it a tweaking to just show the section headers - this might be easier than it seemed. I've removed "Prepare for Battle" cause that should probably go with the Ride itself on the games page, otherwise everything slots together fairly neatly. I really hate, for instance, that we don't currently subdivide the Titan section to separate the alt. timeline or letters page stuff. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 17:49, 12 May 2015 (EDT)
:::::::Looks good to me. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 17:57, 12 May 2015 (EDT)
::::::::Agreed. Even just the contents list alone is a billion times more readable than the live article. [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]]) 18:12, 12 May 2015 (EDT)
::This is a really good iudea. And man, seeing convos like this makes me feel better about where we're headed. I mean, this is a shit-ton of work we're heading into (I'm still mulling some of the disambig deals), but I think this is a good direction overall. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 17:20, 12 May 2015 (EDT)
 
== Splitting by species ==
Yeah, I'm rocking the boat this morning - here's another practise I think we need to stop, in the name of accessibility. I think there was merit early on when it was rare, and I think we'd agree it ''largely'' spun out of the absolute need to keep ''Masterforce'' versions of characters separate from their American counterparts, but the more times that, say, IDW turns a Nebulan into a Cybertronian, the more the distinction for characters like these becomes pointless. I'm inclinded to think along the same lines as we have to do when we discuss splitting a movieverse character - ROTF Lockdown and AOE Lockdown, for instance, are both iterations of the "factionless trophy-collecting hook-handed bounty hunter" Lockdown "archetype", so it would be dumb to split them. But by that token, say, Nebulan Tracer and IDW Tracer are both rooted in the same "he's Scoop's yellow gun" basis. Peacemaker and Headmasters Peaceman]are both "Pointblank's little gun dude". G1 Brisko and IDW Brisko are both "the guy who has Fangry's face on his back who hangs out with a guy who looks like Fangry". And when you get down to it, sources like the Ladybird Books and the Young Corgi books have been depicting Nebulans as robots since 1987. Let's talk about this. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 05:52, 28 May 2015 (EDT)
:I'm having trouble visualising what this involves, so to help organise it I'll add a list underneath of affected pages (please edit and update) --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] ([[User talk:Emvee|talk]]) 07:45, 28 May 2015 (EDT)
 
:I'll throw in - again - that I think we ought to have a sub-intro template, something that lets us write an intro paragraph for a guy like Fort Max at the top of his IDW or ''Headmasters'' cartoon section, calling it out visually that ''this is an important and somewhat different version of this character''. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] ([[User talk:Repowers|talk]]) 16:30, 28 May 2015 (EDT)
::I'm for it. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 00:41, 29 May 2015 (EDT)
:::I hadn't realised it ''was'' being split by species. There's a point to splitting up the main Masterforce characters and Nebulans we saw a lot of (like if IDW do a robot Galen) and honestly Serpentor (''Wings'' Serpentor is pretty distinct from regular Serpentor), but most of them what's the point? Yeah, stop the splits. --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 17:49, 2 June 2015 (GMT)
 
===Characters split by species===
{{collist|3|
*Aimless (G1)/Aimless (Headmasters)
*Aquastar (Masterforce)/Aquastar (G1)
*Blowpipe (G1)/Blowpipe (Headmasters)
*Brisko (G1)/Brisko (IDW)
*Caliburst (G1)/Caliburst (Headmasters)
*Holepunch (G1)/Holepunch (IDW)
*Peacemaker/Peaceman (Headmasters)
*Pinpointer (G1)/Pointech
*Spoilsport/Spoil (Headmasters)
*Tracer (Nebulan)/Tracer (IDW)
*Zetca (Masterforce)/Zetca (G1)
}}
 
===Characters with multiple species on one page===
{{collist|3|
*[[Centuriton]] (Stentarian and Mini-Con)
*[[Firebolt]]/"Professor Sparks"
*[[Lug]] (Nebulan and Cyberdroid)
*[[Serpentor]]
*[[Zigzag]] (Nebulan and Cyberdroid)
*[[Windshear]] (Stentarian, Mini-Con, and Micromaster)
}}
 
Again, seconded. Plus this phenomenon will likely continue to worsen in the near future.--[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 08:10, 28 May 2015 (EDT)
:For whatever it's worth, IDW Zetca, Aquastar, Holepunch, Tracer, and Brisko (and maybe [[Wilder]] too) have never been human/Nebulan-sized beings, do not transform into weapons or heads, most likely will never transform into weapons or heads, and mostly do their own stuff apart from the IDW version of their -master partner. Isn't being a non-Cybertronian recruited to joining the (heroic or villainous) alien war a significant part of the character background of their archetype? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 10:58, 28 May 2015 (EDT)
 
::We're not here to impose order where none exists, simply for order's sake. IDW Brisko is the IDW incarnation of Fangry's head-forming dude from G1, derived from the same toy and bio - that's pretty much beyond dispute. Separating them onto two pages... accomplishes what, exactly? Consistency? Which is good because... why? -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] ([[User talk:Repowers|talk]]) 14:56, 28 May 2015 (EDT)
 
Sure. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 11:04, 28 May 2015 (EDT)
 
I completely agree with Chris's contention. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 15:29, 28 May 2015 (EDT)
 
:What about [[Stratotronic Jet]] and [[Stratotronic]]? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 22:09, 31 May 2015 (EDT)
::One's a ''thing'', the other's a ''character''. Why are you even posing this question? --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 22:25, 31 May 2015 (EDT)
 
Also on the topic of things that are unnecessarily separate: articles for the Predacons who were in Prime and their original Covenant of Primus counterparts. E.G. [[Predaking (Prime)]] and [[Predaking (COP)]]. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 23:17, 28 May 2015 (EDT)
:Eeeehhhhhn. I'm iffy on that, in that the Prime Preds are supposed to be clones in the same timestream. So like, derived from the originals, but NOT the originals. It strikes me as a different thing that "alternate universe incarnation". --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 12:43, 29 May 2015 (EDT)
::Mmhn, yeah. I mean, I get that they're essentially identical, but they do "co-exist" with their own clones. I'm looking more at cases where okay, that dude's normally a nebulon but he's a robot but, but it doesn't matter because he's still ''this version's'' take on that same character. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 12:49, 29 May 2015 (EDT)
:::I think it's clear that clones should get their own pages. e.g. Would we merge [[Dinobot (BW)]] and [[Dinobot II]]? Or [[Soundwave (G1)]], [[Soundwave (G2)]], and [[Soundwave (MW)]]? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 16:53, 29 May 2015 (EDT)
::::Just to play devil's advocate, those characters coexist with their clonal progenitor, the Predacons don't. I think abates is meaning that the Predacons could be seen as more reincarnation than duplication. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 00:01, 1 June 2015 (EDT)
 
Bringing this up again. We doing this, now that we're less distracted by "Ask whoever"? --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 18:34, 30 June 2015 (EDT)
:I vote for merging. [[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 19:04, 30 June 2015 (EDT)
::On this topic of clones vs. regeneration, if the decision does end up towards merging, might I suggest something along the lines of the entry for "The Patsy" for the [[Ejector]] page, and other similar entries? The original for a lot of these characters are basically just footnotes, important only because of their relationship to a more prominent character. Having a section at the bottom of the page for the "Original (Predacon name)" under "Related characters" might be a nice way to have an entry for the originals that distinct, but integrated into the clones' pages. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:31, 12 July 2015 (EDT)
 
==A different kind of cleanup==
In the same vein of "making this more accessible"... a skim of Tumblr posts about the wiki has turned up quite a lot of... well, let's politely call it "risque" humor. And I'm thinking we should probably trim that down. Tentacle-hentai jokes, dick jokes, etc. We've cut back in other areas that could cause hurt/offense, so maybe let's keep moving that way? We don't need to remove humor, but do we really need sex jokes? --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 22:46, 3 June 2015 (EDT)
: Yeah, as I go through articles, I try to remove or replace captions with a certain color, but I'm only one dude, and there are 20,000 pages on this thing.  --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 13:04, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
:: Just for reference, is there an upper limit on how risqué things should be? Obviously stuff like racial slurs and homophobia are right out, but what about captions like [[Fire on the Mountain (episode)|this?]] [[User:Grum|Grum]] ([[User talk:Grum|talk]]) 13:14, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
:::That's borderline, in that it's a joke that is not immediately, bluntly "''ha ha penis''". But removing it would not be a bad move.<br>
:::As I think of it, we MIGHT want to have a template or something for... well, bluntly, to put at the top of some of some articles that warn about material that's really not suited for kids. It's be ''mostly'' Kiss Players articles that fall under this, granted, but still. It just feels like a bit of due diligence. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 15:11, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
::::I do think it's important to not, like, declare sexuality of any kind as terrible and offlimits, but to keep the sketchier references off.  Remove stuff that objectifies rather than stuff that's just in the general neighborhood of "this is related to how new biological organisms are made."  --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 15:48, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
:::::Oh, sure. I wasn't wanting to scrub the wiki "clean". I mean, ''Animated'' had a sex joke in its opening miniseries. But I don't think a warning on top of the KP stuff would be out of order, because... yyyyyyeah. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 16:00, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
 
== GoBots articles ==
 
Is there some reason why we're not having full coverage of the GoBots characters' exploits in GoBots fiction? It seems kind of silly to acknowledge their existence in Transformers media and then... not really provide relevant information. It's not really like there's any cohesive GoBots site with all information in one spot, you know? [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 03:43, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
:There is such a site, and its existence has been cited in the past here as one of multiple valid reasons why adding GoBots to this wiki has never gotten off the ground.  http://counter-x.net/gobots/  --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 08:34, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
::As good as that site is, it doesn't go into nearly as much detail about its topic as we do about ours. Also, it is maintained by a much more limited set of editors (maybe even just one?). Our larger editor base could bring more eyes and viewpoints to the material. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 09:07, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
:It's been discussed in the past with some trepidation, and the idea of a "sister wiki" for GoBots content was floated, but nobody really seemed into the idea and we haven't talked about it since. At this point, though, with more and more GoBots stuff working its way into TF fiction, along with the complete release of the GoBots cartoon on DVD, perhaps it's time to talk about giving the GoBots show and characters their full and proper due on TFWiki again. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 05:29, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
::I don't actually know all that much about the GoBots *coughthatswhyweneedinformativearticlescough*, but I'd be more than willing to help with article maintenance and setup if we ever decide to go ahead with it. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 05:46, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
:::As I've said before, when the GoBots wiki was proposed I was told that there were technical issues to be taken care of before it could be opened for editing and that the community would be told when it was ready. The next I heard about it was that it was being shut down as not having attracted interested editors. I am still fully supportive of either option, a sister wiki or integration. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 07:12, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
::::A sister wiki seems like an weird excuse to overcomplicate things. Is there really any reason to not have all the information in one spot? [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 07:26, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
:::::At the risk of overcomplicating things further, since we'd be including Go-Bots because the characters were retroactively made into alternate universe Cybertronians/Transformers, would we also provide complete coverage of [[Robotix]] since it was retroactively altered the same way? --[[User:DrSpengler|DrSpengler]] ([[User talk:DrSpengler|talk]]) 07:59, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
::::::I'd say no, because we wouldn't be covering GoBots specifically because they were retconned to be alt-universe TFs, we'd be covering them because involvement of their universe and characters has become a recurring thing, and the two franchise have always been paired in some capacity or another. Maybe when Robotix actually does something that ''matters'' and isn't just a winky in-joke; otherwise covering them would amount to covering something like Jem or Inhumanoids in full. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 08:04, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
 
:::::: Oh god please no to Robotix.--[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 09:00, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
 
:::::::For the sake of argument: TFWiki don't have complete coverage of G.I. Joe, despite it's many interactions with Transformers. TFWiki has relevant articles, but not complete coverage. Why do so for GoBots? --[[User:Crockalley|Crockalley]] ([[User talk:Crockalley|talk]]) 08:10, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
::::::::Can you REALLY not see a difference between G.I.Joe, Jem, Inhumanoids, etc and GoBots and Robotix? ''Really''? GoBots and Robotix have both been said to be counterparts of the Transformers. Joe, Jem, and the Inhumanoids haven't. Covering GoBots and Robotix fiction IS covering TF fiction, covering Joe, Jem, and Inhumanoids fiction is not. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 08:15, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::For the love of God, NO.  We already feature all the GoBots characters and stories that were published under the TF brand label, just like the relevant Avengers and G.I.Joes.  We don't pull in all of the everythings that all of their colleagues ever did in unrelated, non-Transformers stories.  It will never belong here.  Adding 80 characters and 100 hours of programming?  No.  As someone said in one of the prior iterations of this, if Vector Prime said that Pandora was a transdimensional embodiment of Cybertron and Eywa was its Vector Sigma portal, we wouldn't fill this wiki with every character and animal from Avatar.  --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 08:26, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::Avatar isn't a property owned by Hasbro nor something that's been constantly involved in the Transformers multiverse, so I'm not seeing the comparison. It also has its own dedicated fanbase and resources, which isn't really something you can say for GoBots; its presence in real life almost wholly overlaps Transformers. (It'd be around 26 hours, to be accurate.) [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 08:46, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::And, ultimately, why does it matter that much if we make one exception for this? It's not going to result in a full-blown biography of Spider-Man from Earth-616 (which exists elsewhere in plenty of places) or full coverage on G.I. Joe (which has its own fanbase that can make a resource if they want to). We're talking about a small subset of articles that you aren't required to work on. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 08:54, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::Why wouldn't it result in a full bio of Spiderman?  The distinction between the two offtopic properties is arbitrary and insignificant.  If you want to talk about ownership, Hasbro owns Visionaries and we know they canonically exist in the Animated galaxy.  Shall we bring in articles on Leoric and Heskidorr and the Pig Imp?  If you break down the rule of "TF branded material only," then the only thing keeping all the Inhumanoids out is personal preference and "oh, come on!"-ing.  --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 09:20, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::''Logic.'' Any potential revival of Visionaries is not going to be done under the Transformers brand. Spider-Man does not exist under the Transformers brand, G.I. Joe does not exist under the Transformers brand. GoBots now, for all intents and purposes, ''does''. A full revival being hilariously unlikely, anything Hasbro does with the IP in the future - as well as everything it is currently actually ''allowing'' licensees to regularly do with the IP in a capacity beyond "referential nudge-nudge wink wink jokes" - is under the Transformers brand. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 09:31, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::On the contrary - the only published Visionaries story material in 29 years was under the TF brand.  It is far more likely that like Inhumanoids, the Visionaries will continue only as a hanger-on of Tramsformers fiction Easter eggs forever.  And all of the GoBots material that was published under the TF brand, and is in any way related to real TF characters and stories, is already here.  Which is all that belongs here.  Hasbro owned Battle Beasts from the start and we currently include all the actual TF branded appearances of Battle Beasts / Beastformers.  But we give only the most sparse coverage to the American comic book and American Battle Beast characters because it wasn't a real, branded, linked TF story the way the Japanese material was.  We have to stick with standards and not just what people might personally find fun.  --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 10:40, 4 June 2015 (EDT) 
::::::::::::::::That's why I stipulated a capacity beyond referential in-jokes for fans, which is all the Inhumanoids or Visionaries references amount to. I think where the disagreement lies is in whether or not we think of GoBots as another franchise that is being "referenced" or having "crossovers" with Tranformers - that's what Visionaries is, but my stance is that it is ''no longer'' the case with GoBots, but that GoBots is now ''part'' of the Transformers franchise and warrants broader treatment than Spider-Man-style articles where we pretend we don't know who Leader-1 is. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 10:52, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::Also, slippery slope arguments are silly, unless the people involved are idiots with no judgement capacity, computers, or state legislatures. You're concerned about things that no one is advocating or interested in. Regardless, I think everyone gets that you're against the idea.--[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 11:00, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::::That's not a slippery slope argument.  That's pointing out that putting in Go-Bots would be inconsistent with how we treat other non-Transformers franchises.  And, frankly, I think Jim Sorenson should probably recuse himself from this discussion since he's the guy trying to use official means to marry TF and Go-Bots with rubber bands, Elmer's glue, and footnotes.  It feels a little disingenuous.  --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 12:23, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::::Fair point. I'll bow out. (Though I'm far from the first or only person to play in this sandbox. In fact, expect  more from others in the very near future.)--[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 12:55, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
 
IF we decided to do this, I think we'd want strict guidelines from the start about what is and is not in scope. Since the toys were mostly licensed from Bandai, a Hasbro competitor, I would say they should NOT be included. Also, ancillary media has been pretty much ignored by TF fiction.
 
My gut says that The Challenge of the GoBots cartoon  (65 episodes, 1 movie) is about the extent of what we'd want to include. No coloring books, no Machine Robo, none of that. It's the easiest bit to do, the most influential, and the bit that Hasbro mostly has claim to.--[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 09:16, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
::Hasbro has a claim to the cartoon?  Then how come [http://www.wbshop.com/product/challenge+of+the+gobots-+the+series,+volume+one+%28mod%29+1000486768.do Time Warner sells it], no probs, without any Hasbro logos anywhere?  --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 12:08, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
:::The text on the back of the original mini-series DVD refers to "Hasbro's GoBots". - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 12:20, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
::::And the newer ones?  --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 12:24, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
:::::They don't mention it, no, but I'm just pointing out that Warner's put it on there. Hasbro don't ''own'' the cartoon, we know that. I think we can all at least agree GoBots is a ''weird'' case, where Hasbro own the "idea" of the property and the characters and story and such but none of the actual physical ''assets''. It's my contention that those "ideas" are now a part of the Transformers brand, and not guest-stars from another franchise. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 12:27, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
::::::As far as I can discern, they own the name, what other trademarks they've maintained, and that's about it.  They don't own the character likenesses and they certainly don't own the toys, and it's confirmed they don't own the cartoon, either.  We're not going to catalog a non-Transformers cartoon Hasbro doesn't own on this wiki, no matter what Vector Prime says.  If you want to cover the "idea" of what they own, that can be accomplished by adding to the already-existing "Gobots" article.  Hasbro owning part of a sliver of an idea of GoBots doesn't mean we need a "Scratch" or "Sparky" article.  --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 12:35, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
:Agreed. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 09:31, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
::I'd still like to see all the other stuff done up, but am willing to leave that for another day if it helps get this moving along. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 09:43, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
:::Same. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 09:50, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
::::This has been asked about 6 times in the recent past, including after the Gobotron incorporation, and it loses every single time.  I think it's insppropriate to seriously discuss going ahead with it after about 2 hours of talk.  --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 10:01, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
:::::I'm not sure what you're defining as the "recent past", but the last time I can find was in [[Transformers_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal/Archive49|2010]]. We're obviously going to wait for more input before we start pumping out articles. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 10:17, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
::::::Here's 2011: http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Talk:Cy-Kill_(GoBots)
::::::Here's 2012:  http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Transformers_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal/GoBots  --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 10:51, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
:::::::I am with Thy.  This has been argued to death a billion times over, and nothing has changed.  We're not about to start cataloguing stuff that isn't Transformers media on our Transformers wiki.  That's the opposite of what this wiki is about, and no amount of Vector Prime answers will make some Hanna-Barbara series into a Transformers one.  Folks who want to catalog Go-Bots should make their own wiki, and if they can't drum up the interest to do so, and have to piggy-back on ours in order to get it done, maybe that should tell ya something.  --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 12:13, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
::::::::Full agreement with Thy and Walky. And I'd like to point out that I'm one of the bastards who created the lion's share of TF-branded GoBots material. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 15:02, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
:If we can't document [http://monzo12782.tumblr.com/post/105019142648/and-then-there-was-that-time-the-renegades that time Cy-Kill dressed up as George Washington], what's the point of cataloging any of it at all? --[[User:Monzo|Monzo]] ([[User talk:Monzo|talk]]) 10:27, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
::Well, you just made my day.--[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 10:44, 4 June 2015 (EDT)
 
 
== GoBots 2015 ==
Hey guess what - people are using AVP to try to settle this internet score too.  What a shock, I know, right?  Multiple wiki editors said the scores of new one-sentence-one-source GoBot articles should all be made into a single list, read commentary here:
http://www.allspark.com/forums/topic/101932-tfwikinet-thread-30/page-96
 
Before very many more one-sentence-one-source articles get installed, I think we should at least have some discussion here.  --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 13:38, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:I say make an exception and do a full coverage on Gobots.--[[User:Primestar3|Primestar3]] ([[User talk:Primestar3|talk]]) 13:48, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
 
:Completely sold on combo pages by Tindalos: we already do include Related Characters on pages like [[Susan Hoffman]], [[Collins (Movie)]]. We could easily do a Guardians#Minor Guardians and Renegades#Minor Renegades for people who haven't got enough to them. (Like, Cop-Tur and Zero gets a lot said about them but Fly Trap does not) Groups like Puzzler could be all stuffed under the Puzzler page. (The Axiom Nexus Renegades, I'd cheat and say keep them on their own pages since ''these'' are meant to be Transformers in-universe.)  --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 18:49, 18 October 2015 (GMT)
 
:Most of the Gobots described by RR are getting more than one note name mentions. History, alt-modes, personality, the works. I wouldn't just conglomerate them all together. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 13:59, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:However, I wouldn't be opposed to consolidating articles like Puzzler, since he's practically a drone, and the Dread Launchers and Secret Riders, since all of them share history. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 14:07, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::I think making a list page is better than having numerous pages with short texts.--[[User:Primestar3|Primestar3]] ([[User talk:Primestar3|talk]]) 14:15, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::If we don't do them all, combining Puzzler, Launchers,and Riders is a good idea anyway.[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 19:18, 18 October 2015 (GMT)
 
:Proof-of-concept page for if we want to list 'em up: put it under fiction (so that's easier to find), put the main Gobotron and the in-universe TFs up top, and stick the details of the minors under that. tfwiki.net/mediawiki/index.php?title=Renegade&oldid=1016174 [[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 19:20, 18 October 2015 (GMT)
::I've been doing most of the Renegade write-ups and most of them seem to be more than just name drops. Generally we get a name, a personality, an alt mode, and often an adventure. That's easily enough for an article. For the exceptions, like Puzzler, a single overarching page isn't a bad idea, but maybe not a necessary idea. The information on the Guardians is much more sparse, and having big lists for most of them could probably work. I haven't been writing them up due to how little there is on most of them.
::I am not sure where the idea comes from that having eighty small articles is a bad thing, though. The Wiki has always erred on the side of inclusiveness, which leads to pages like [[Spike's booty call]] and [[Moe]] and [[DeForest High]], things which are also one or two line articles about people and concepts that only appear in one source. I'm not sure why this is any different. If anything, there's way more interest in the GoBot material, as evidenced by how many people are asking questions about the Renegades and how many likes and shares those pages are getting.
::I'm also seeing, both in this thread and in the thread linked to, lots of interest in wikiing up the entire "Challenge of the Gobots" cartoon. McFeely, Khajidha, Saix, Sorenson, originally, and now Primestar and Gearshift all seem to be in favor. On the other side, Walky, M Sipher, Thylacine. It seems odd to me that, with the momentum apparently leaning 2:1 towards documenting all of "Challenge of the Gobots", we're talking about curtailing the bits and bobs that are definitely for sure Transformers canon. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 15:49, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::Logistical question: Do enough people have the GoBots DVD (or, cough, other sources) to write them up? (We ''are'' still lagging in fleshed out UT character pages, after all, and I think more people own those shows). -- [[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 19:20, 18 October 2015 (GMT)
::::Well, episodes are on the internet.--[[User:Primestar3|Primestar3]] ([[User talk:Primestar3|talk]]) 16:01, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::Episodes aren't licensed by Hasbro, so we cannot write them up and place them here.  Ever.   
:::::Giggidy:  this is different from the silly jokes you refer to because at least those jokes are contained within licensed Transformers material.  The GoBots AS PEOPLE REMEMBER THEM - the cartoons, characters, and toys - were never released under a Hasbro license, except for a tiny minority of exceptions in text stories.  Even IF we settled for allowing independent articles for everything AVP said, it could never, ever contain any material more than that, because Hasbro didn't publish it and doesn't own it. 
:::::All in all I am extremely disappointed by the... I guess, poor sportsmanship, pettiness, and entitlement... of the pro-inclusion side.  This has been rehashed and reargued and relitigated year after year after year after year with very clear reasons why they do not belong, and for some reason people think none of that matters because GoBots were just cool!  Well, Samhain and the Bogey Man from the DIC Ghostbusters cartoon were just cool and we've got the Ghostbusters in here as an in-joke, but we don't freaking add in Samhain the demon from a DIC cartoon through overeager bootstrapping.  We also don't add in the very awesome and well-loved Dark Phoenix by extrapolation just because the Allspark Almanac mentioned an M'kraan Crystal. 
:::::The MOST that could EVER be included about any of these GoBots is the stuff AVP writes, because at least that IS put out by Hasbro.  I and quite a few others think that even that much material isn't much at all and since it's coming in a rapidfire slew for a lot of characters I think a list format collection is worth discussing.  If a lot of people really really really disagree, then I could rationally grasp the argument that through the loophole that has been cheated into existence they have grounds on which to disagree and the articles containing the AVP material could hypothetically each stand on their own.  But that's ALL that can go there.  Only AVP.  No cartoon, nothing else.  And even that should not be taken for granted by the pro-inclusion side.  They really have to sell their case, because from here it's STILL way too heavily predicated upon "oh-come-ON!"-ism.  --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 16:18, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::This isn't about winning arguments from years ago-most of us weren't even signed up when the AAII came out and everybody got into a whole mess over that. Many of us honestly think that documenting the series is something that we should do and within the jurisdiction. You can disagree with putting it up on the wiki, but don't just throw about terms like "pettiness" and "entitlement" cause you don't like the opposing sides argument or the fiction causing it in the first place. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 16:46, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::I would suggest Hasbro's ownership or non-ownership is irrelevant. We document many things not owned by Hasbro but merely associated with them, including the entire Japanese franchise (owned by TakaraTomy) and the entire film franchise (owned and copyrighted by Paramount, with only the Transformers elements used under license from Hasbro). --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 16:50, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::Ownership by TakTom is just as legitimate as ownership by Hasbro, and licensing is just as legitimate as ownership.  Things that are neither owned nor licensed by a company that actually produces real Transformers, such as a Hanna-Barbera cartoon, are not legitimate for inclusion.  Otherwise we'll be throwing in fanfic and third-party toys and Family Guy episodes with TF "appearances."  --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 17:04, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::There is a possible justification for their inclusion that would still bar those other things. We could decide that having had the GoBots declared to actually be TFs in a multiversal sense means that any material that was officially produced about them is now open for inclusion (the fact that it was officially produced under the auspices of Tonka would be a mere detail). This would not open the floodgates for fanfic, 3rd party materials or Family Guy. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 17:47, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::That concept has been decided-''against'', here, many times.  --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 18:19, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::Saying that we've voted against something in the past is not a strong argument for why we should vote against it now. Things change, the population of editors change, our understanding of the material changes. Gay marriage was illegal, now it's legal. I'm not saying you're stomping on my civil liberties, but you really need a more compelling argument than "we've said no before." Besides, you're the one who jumpstarted this conversation.
:::::::::::My point with Paramount was that there are elements that we document fully that aren't owned by Hasbro. They're owned by another corporation, and are used adjacent to Hasbro material. Hasbro doesn't own, say, Seymour Simmons. Paramount does. But we document him because he's a Transformers character. Likewise, Hasbro doesn't own some elements of Challenge of the Gobots, Hanna-Barbara does. But Kenner did license certain elements to Hanna-Barbara to make the GoBots cartoon, and Kenner is now Hasbro. Effectively it's the same situation legally. We do the same thing with other crossovers, like [[DreamMix TV World Fighters]] or the [[Avengers]] book.
:::::::::::And even if it wasn't, our decisions about what's in scope and what isn't is just that, our decision. It's reached by consensus, after reasoned debate. If the consensus is that Gobots is close enough, passes the squint test, we certainly could choose to include it. You're acting as if your statments are akin to "it's obvious that water is wet", a fact, when in fact they're closer to "marriage has always been defined as being between a man and a woman," a social convention. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 18:35, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::I am not purporting to cite stone tablets from a thousand years ago - I am referring back to ''the conversation FOUR MONTHS AGO directly above this one.''  Your reference to DreamMix proves my point perfectly:  we include things that had an official Transformers creator stamp at time of publication, like Simon Belmondo, and NOT ancillary same-universe stuff that DID NOT, like Sypha Belnades.  Ditto for Avenger characters that never had the stamp like the Brothers Grimm or whatever.  We don't get to enjoy our way past the clear concept of who really owned and licensed what and when.  --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 18:55, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::So we've got the two positions:
::::::::::::a) GoBots the cartoon is not Hasbro licensed or involved in any way; we should only properly cover GB stuff in Hasbro-approved stuff like Fun Publications, AVP, comic homages etc
::::::::::::b) Approved stuff has now made so many GoBots nods and explicit references to the show (all the way back [[Games of Deception|to 2007]] and almost [[G1_GoBots|2004]]) that this is no longer a big jump but a natural thing to do.
::::::::::::without much budging. We could put it up to an editor vote? --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 18:49, 18 October 2015 (GMT)
::::::::::::It might be a bit off topic, but are you sure about Simmons? Hasbro put out a Human Alliance toy with Agent Simmons. I don't have the box and didn't read all the fine print, but the front of the box has "Agent Simmons™" next to a Hasbro logo. One movieverse character that might be wholly affiliated with paramount and not Hasbro might be [[Bendy-Bus Prime]]. - [[User:Gimmick|Gimmick]] ([[User talk:Gimmick|talk]]) 19:00, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::We include stuff that includes Transformers even without an official Transformers stamp, like [[Unfoldings!]]. And the conversation four months ago looks like it was 4 in favor, 3 against, so it's not really a great argument for you. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:10, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::How in the world can you imagine an issue of the GIJoe comic starring Transformers to NOT BE official licensed product?  --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 19:24, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::I didn't say that it wasn't licensed. I said it didn't have a Transformers stamp. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:39, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::Also by my count of the last conversation it was 2 in favor, 4 against, 1 seemingly not strongly decided, and 1 recusal due to professional conflict of interest.  --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 19:50, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::My count: McFeely, Khajidha, Saix, Sorenson, for, Walky, M Sipher, Thylacine against. Sorenson's position was clear. And M Sipher also worked professional on GoBots, so if we're discounting Sorenson, we should probably discount Sipher as well. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 20:22, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::Unfoldings is Hasbro-stamped though, and we don't describe much of the Joe plot.
::::::::::::::Either way, if it was that close a call last time, should we just aye or nay it?--[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 00:14, 19 October 2015 (GMT)
:::::::::::::::It's been like four hours. This is a big decision and should have at least 2-3 days debate. Honestly, I haven't even decided how I feel, I just think Thy's arguments are pretty weak. That doesn't mean there aren't some strong ones. Let's not go calling for votes just yet. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:18, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::[[Help:Official info]]: the first sentence under "What constitutes official information?" seems relevant here. There is no way anything included in the movies is anything less than relevant to this wiki. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 19:26, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
'''"Simply put, anything coming either directly or indirectly from Hasbro and/or TakaraTomy, or from other official parties such as (currently) IDW Publishing, Paramount Pictures, Fun Publications or other companies officially involved with the Transformers brand."'''
:::::::::::::Right. And since Kenner is wholly owned by Hasbro, then despite being owned by Hanna-Barbara, GoBots was (retroactively) coming directly from Hasbro as much as the movies are. Then the only question becomes is GoBots a Transformers subline. Hasbro and FunPub seem to feel that it is, and have been using the [[Gobots|name]] [[G1 GoBots|and]][[Ask Vector Prime|concepts]] [[Go-Bot (G2)|for]] [[Withered Hope|decades]].--[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:39, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::The key - and wrong - word being "retroactively."  Takara's Diaclones became Transformers, and there are occasional Diaclone references we catalog.  But we do not catalog 1970s-80s pre-Transformer content as anything beyond curiosities and footnotes; they don't get their box-back name-dropped characters and events covered here; in fact the "Cymond" content we have is new, not vintage.  The same goes for Macross and Beetras and Brave as well.  --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 19:57, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::Also, I feel that I should point out that some members of the Wiki are at TFCon at the moment and unable to take part in this discussion. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 20:05, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::Another excellent reason not to rush into any hasty votes.--[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 20:16, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::Well I'm back and guess what? Fuck individual articles. Stuff them all into a single "Renegade" article. The idea of a ton of two-sentence articles from a singular source that is blatantly doing this to ramrod shit we have repeatedly and recently said "no" to remains goddamn stupid and counter-productive. There's better arguments for documenting everything G.I. Joe than GoBots, and we're not fucking doing that. MAKE A SEPARATE GOBOTS WIKI. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 20:29, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::::Except since the whole thing's started, it's moved on from name drops to actually expanding the histories of the characters, which is why many are turning back to the idea of individual Gobot articles. There's plenty of G.I. Joes and Cobra members who do nothing of note in the series they appear in with the TFs, but the only consolidated one is the Dreadnoks since they share most of their appearances together, which could work for Puzzler and others like that. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 20:54, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::::Making the separate Go-Bots articles doesn't take away anything from the rest of the wiki. And if they're short articles, well, they are what they are. We have recorded the entirety of Transformers fiction covering their subject on one page, and that fiction is very sparse, but it is accurate, and faithful to the wiki's mission of documenting information. Beyond that though, I'd say I'd vote against merging in information about non-Hasbro/Takara/whatevs owned properties into the articles, such as the Go-Bots cartoon. A sister wiki seems like it would be the best idea, though I can't volunteer my services to completing it as of right now, as I'm pretty thoroughly engaged on other projects on THIS wiki. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 21:13, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
 
 
It's been a week since this last came up and I know there are people still pissed that GoBots stuff is added at all, so can we pull the pin and decide? We all know the arguments by now. Whether we should reduce most of the existing GoBot pages or leave them (this seems to be all they're getting now Renegade Rhetoric's ended) is an important but I think separate issue to: include GoBots fiction in its entirety on this wiki or do not include anything but what comes out under Hasbro material. <br>
At this point I've swung round to being against adding ''Challenge'' material; it should have its own wiki, which could be created tomorrow if people wanted. --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 01:19, 26 October 2015 (GMT)
:I vote for leaving the Go-Bot articles as we have them now. They're hardly "two-sentence articles" for the most part, and whether we personally like something or not hardly has bearing on its inclusion in the wiki. Lots of people hate [[The Beast Within]], but its here. And AVP has more people involved in its production, and more research put through it than that comic did. When there's going to be a Go-Bot's wiki, we'll link it in the articles like we do to other outside wikis. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 21:36, 25 October 2015 (EDT)
::I'm in favour of keeping the existing AVP, FunPub stuff too. Just draw the line there and all. --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 01:40, 26 October 2015 (GMT)
:::By the way, thanks to all the editors who have been working hard to keep all the Guardians and Renegades articles updated! It's a big help, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who appreciates it greatly. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 21:44, 25 October 2015 (EDT)
 
I've been thinking on this and, despite the relatively weak arguments against including ''Challenge'' material, something about including it feels off to me. I think intellectually the case for inclusion is very strong, but I think emotionally it'd probably feel better somewhere else. I'd agree with Charles about voting on against full-on-wikifying ''Challenge''. I've also been one of several people writing-up the GoBots articles and I'd strenuously disagree with deleting them. There is plenty of information on even the scantiest of them, including at the minimum names, factions, actions taken. The wiki is replete with articles for less. In the case of virtually every Renegade, we get at least two adventures, personality, and alt modes. Some Guardians get similar treatment. A few characters have visuals. It'd be silly to torch them.
As I said, I've been thinking on this and I think there may be a compromise solution between the two extremes, one of a big list due to a relative paucity of material, the other of wikifying everything from ''Challenge.'' I propose we only wiki up what's actually been said about the characters in a Transformers medium... but, to give the articles a little more oomph, we add in a main picture from ''Challenge'' if (and only if) there is no official Transformers image available. We've in the past shown a willingness to use these images in the notes section, so we'd only be bumping them up to the top. The copyright shouldn't be an issue, Challenge of the Gobots sports a Tonka copyright, and Tonka is wholly owned by Hasbro. This way we're still limiting to the "facts" of Transformers, but the articles will look and feel a little more robust. Only one image per character, and then only if they haven't gotten an official illustration. Thoughts?--[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 21:45, 25 October 2015 (EDT)
 
== Adaptations storylinks ==
 
I understand that we're trying to move towards a less cluttered version of the Movie series character pages, but I sometimes feel it's a shame that a lot of media goes unlisted on these characters' pages, since they are merely adaptations of the more prominent movies. Especially since some of these media contain slight changes to the storyline, albeit ones too insignificant to warrant their own section on the page. I was thinking of maybe including notes such as these after the story summaries for [[Transformers (film)]], [[Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (film)]], etc.
{{note|(This character)'s involvement in the preceding events, or events mostly similar, were also chronicled in the following media: {{storylink|Transformers: Beginnings (Movie)|Transformers: Beginnings}}/ {{storylink|Bumblebee Rumble}}/ {{storylink|Transformers: Movie Adaptation}}/ {{storylink|Optimus Prime Versus Megatron}}/ {{storylink|The Quest for the AllSpark}}/ {{storylink|Sam's New Car}}/ {{storylink|Transformers (interactive Play-a-Sound Storybook)}}/ {{storylink|Transformers (novel)}}/ {{storylink|Transformers: The Junior Novel}}/ {{storylink|Transformers: The Movie Storybook}}}}


Of course, the note would vary depending if the character actually DOES appear in the adaptations. Thoughts? Stupid idea or not? --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 23:33, 7 June 2015 (EDT)
== What are we calling the new  "Core" Transformers stuff? ==
:I don't think storylinks are meant to be used in notes. It ought to be something like "were also chronicled in the motion comic "[[Transformers: Beginnings (Movie)|Transformers: Beginnings]]" and the books "[[Optimus Prime Versus Megatron]]", "[[The Quest for the AllSpark]]"" and so on. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 00:00, 8 June 2015 (EDT)
::That's fine by me. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 01:28, 8 June 2015 (EDT)


== Proposed solution for Sideways debacle, because this isn't going away any time soon, apparently. ==
So... what should we call the new generically branded "Transformers" toys that have been showing up? (Prime Changers, Smash Changers, Tiny Turbo Changers, maybe more in the future). Should it be a separate new thing or maybe part of [[Transformers Authentics|''Authentics'']]?  The Prime Changer [[Optimus Prime (G1)/toys#Authentics|Optimus]], [[Bumblebee (G1)/toys#Authentics|Bumbleebee]], and [[Megatron (G1)/toys#PrimeChanger|Megatron]] were previously added under ''Authentics'', while someone just started using "Transformers (2026)" for the Tiny Turbo [[Arcee (G1)/toys#Tiny Turbo Changers|Arcee]] and [[Elita One (G1)#Tiny Turbo Changers|Elita]], which got me thinking that we should probably figure this out soon.<br>From what I've gathered they all use "TRA Core" in their listing names, but their packaging design seems identical to current ''Authentics'' packaging design, also lacking a distinct subtitle and focusing on "Evergreen" characters to start off. Then again, Hasbro homogenizing all their packaging designs in the last year makes it hard to tell if this line is meant to be its own thing. Though it is notable that unlike prior ''Authentics'', this "Core" line is using bigger size classes and is available at bigger retailers like Target instead of dollar stores. –[[User:BluJayWarrior|BluJayWarrior]] ([[User talk:BluJayWarrior|talk]]) 18:24, 13 January 2026 (EST)


I think one of the major problems with Sideways as a chracter, is that we're trying to treat him as any other character, when he kinda isn't. He's the result of multiple authors' conflicting authorial intent. Just like Primus and Unicron get special treatments for their pages (once they've been established as multiversal singularities, everything get worked together on one page), I propose Sideways gets his own special treatment for his page. But Sideways is a unique case, and so should get a unique treatment. I propose Sideways's disambig page to be made into his main page. There, a short bio can take up the top of the page, explaining his multi-dimensional shenanigans. A follow up note clarifying that, since Sideays ISN'T a multiversal singularity, any of the following Sideways could or could not be the same Sideways, be Sideways other Sideways have interacted with, impersonated, killed, been cloned from, etc. Each Sideways article could also have a note that links back to the disambig page, reiterating the situation. Thoutghs? --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 15:17, 30 June 2015 (EDT)
:I was JUST adding a section here and rather than rewriting...<br>
:That sounds ideal to me, and a lot more elegant than either merging the pages or what we have at the moment. [[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 15:28, 30 June 2015 (EDT)
:Okay just kinda checking in, because thanks to Hasbro's goddamn infuriating thing about not promoting/announcing anything other than the expensive collector crap, the load of sub-line-less not-''Authentics'' "Core" stuff hitting Targets (at least, has anything popped up at Walmart?) is a bit of a "how do we handle this" deal. Both "how much product is there" and "do we treat this as a separate line, as an extension of Authentics despite it not being a 'discount' store line, or what". I'm leaning towards "just list it as its own line with G1 characters unless pretty explicitly otherwise". --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 18:30, 13 January 2026 (EST)
:Sounds interesting. Could you mock up what you think the disambig page would look like? --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 15:29, 30 June 2015 (EDT)
::Oh right, Walmart. Off memory they do have the ''Authentics''-styled [[Bumblebee (G1)/toys#MegaSting|Mega Sting Bumbleebee]] (could also be considered a "larger price point" I guess). No clue if any listings gave it a separate name like "Core" has. Walmart also has a bunch of merch stuff in ''Authentics''-style packaging like big head helicopters, Dancing Transformers and a giant RC Bumblebee. [[User:BluJayWarrior|BluJayWarrior]] ([[User talk:BluJayWarrior|talk]]) 18:57, 13 January 2026 (EST)
::Sure, I'll whip something up. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 15:34, 30 June 2015 (EDT)
:::Now, see, this is the kind of thinking we need more of. Break the rules, fer goshsakes! - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 15:57, 30 June 2015 (EDT)
::::Here's my mock-up:
[[User:Ascendron/sandbox: Sideways (disambig)]]
Didn't take the time to look up some dates, and I'm open to suggestions to polish/rework some of the paragraphs, but this is more or less what I have in mind. What do you guys things? --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:18, 30 June 2015 (EDT)
:Much better. We need to be doing more stuff like this, rather than trying to shoehorn shit into things that don't fit. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 16:34, 30 June 2015 (EDT)
::I'd say that the pages should be RID, Armada/Cybertron (including Robotmasters), Movie, Animated, and Kre-O. I'd also put the notes about the history of his dimension-hopping-ness on the disambig page, along with a fiction section for stuff like Ask Sideways, which kind of has "a blend of all the Sidewayses" as its selling point. [[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 16:54, 30 June 2015 (EDT)
:::A stunning display of rationality!--[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 16:57, 30 June 2015 (EDT)
::::Sounds good to me. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 17:03, 30 June 2015 (EDT)
::::Looks good, although I wouldn't split the UT Sideways into Armada and Cybertron, mostly since the Hasbro edition of AVP made it clear that Hasbro thought of them as the same character. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 17:21, 30 June 2015 (EDT)
:::::I'll let you guys make the finishing touches to this page, as I have to go to work and then Celebrate Canada Day. I think this is as much as I can do for this page anyways, as I said earlier, I'm not overly familiar with the bulk of this character's fiction. I am very happy this is getting a lot of positive feedback though! --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 17:25, 30 June 2015 (EDT)
:::::Like like like like like. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] ([[User talk:Repowers|talk]]) 22:45, 30 June 2015 (EDT)
::::::I went ahead with the article, as there didn't seem to be any strong oppositions to it. Also, thank you Riptide for your contribution to the page, they were very useful. The whole thing needs some work, with the "individual" Sideways's pages needing work, but I think this is a good start. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 18:28, 1 July 2015 (EDT)
:::::::The pages certainly look neater this way. Just curious - what makes Robotmasters Sideways a special case? Is he explicitly stated to be the Armada guy? -- [[User:Flicky1991|flicky]][[User talk:Flicky1991|1991]] 04:07, 2 July 2015 (EDT)


== Cloud characters' toys ==
== Size of the page again ==


Now that all the ''[[Transformers Cloud]]'' Autobots and Decepticons have been moved to their G1 pages, should all the G1 pages' toy sections note when ''Cloud'' characters repurposed FoC designs? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 10:19, 2 July 2015 (EDT)
This page is getting pretty long again, so could someone archive the last year? [[User:Hilfam|Hilfam]] ([[User talk:Hilfam|talk]]) 12:03, 22 January 2026 (EST)
:Yes. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 10:43, 2 July 2015 (EDT)


== Probably an unpopular thought, but... ==
== Idea for a page? ==


Considering the unique overlap, should we be keeping Primax and Viron versions of RID characters on separate pages? [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 12:38, 6 July 2015 (EDT)
Perhaps a page discussing the various Transformers that have "base modes" as a third form, like Powermaster Prime, Motormaster, etc. It's a major recurring gimmick since G1. [[User:DrakeyC|DrakeyC]] ([[User talk:DrakeyC|talk]]) 09:09, 30 January 2026 (EST)
:[[Talk:Transformers:_Robots_in_Disguise_(2001_franchise)#Car_Robots|No.]] --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 14:12, 6 July 2015 (EDT)
:I think a general "[[base mode]]" article would make sense, yeah. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 10:19, 30 January 2026 (EST)
::That discussion seems to be about renaming (RID) to (CR) or whatever. I'm asking why [[Sky-Byte (RID)]] and [[Sky-Byte (G2)]] are separate pages when the former already occupies both continuity families at once. I just think it's a case where trying to adhere to the purity of continuities/universal clusters is resulting in a half-assed and contradictory presentation. And all over a franchise that has only a cartoon and one comic story as fiction. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 15:09, 6 July 2015 (EDT)
::seconded. frankly shocked to learn there isn't one already --[[User:Arren1234 |Arren Meuchel]] [[User_talk:Arren1234 |(talk)]] 11:58, 30 January 2026 (EST)
:::I'm trying to think if this affects any other characters besides Sky-Byte, because honestly, if he was the only one, I'd probably be inclined to go for it. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 15:15, 6 July 2015 (EDT)
:::I think base modes lend themselves better to a category page rather than a full-blown article. What would it even say? “Some Transformers have Base Modes. Here’s a list of all the toys, here’s a list of all the episodes/issues where a base mode appeared.[[User:Cylasbreakdown|Cylasbreakdown]] ([[User talk:Cylasbreakdown|talk]]) 16:51, 4 February 2026 (EST)
::::[[Side Burn (G1)]], [[Slapper (G1)]], [[Dark Scream (G1)]], and [[Wrecker Hook]]. Wrecker Hook should probably be merged anyway, since all of the CR-to-G1 stuff is kept on Sky-Byte's and Fortress Maximus's pages. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 15:19, 6 July 2015 (EDT)
::::I don't see why not. We have articles specifically for [[Beast mode]], [[Super Mode]], [[attack mode]], and [[transportation mode]]. For such a prominent feature of Transformers since its early days I'm surprised there doesn't seem to be a specific write-up about city/base modes anywhere, and not even as single mention on the main [[alternate mode]] page. Closest I can find is [[Titan (group)#Alternate modes]]. [[User:BluJayWarrior|BluJayWarrior]] ([[User talk:BluJayWarrior|talk]]) 18:01, 4 February 2026 (EST)
:But Robots in Disguise is a separate continuity family to Generation 1 in the English speaking world, and we've always approached things from a Western mindset where applicable. I don't see why Car Robots being part of Generation 1 should mean we should merge RID characters with their G1 counterparts. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 16:25, 6 July 2015 (EDT)
:::::I attempted a [[User:MahXyme/Sandbox/Base Mode|sandbox for a Base Mode page]] long ago, but I stopped since I realized it would require an extensive amount of work to list all fiction usages & differentiate what counts/what does not count not (something I struggled with the [[Micromaster#The Transformers|Micromasters Transports]] assorments -[[User:MahXyme|MahXyme/MahXymal]] ([[User talk:MahXyme|talk]]) 17:53, 5 February 2026 (EST)
::But the characters still exist in both families regardless, especially as Japan makes more fiction for those characters and we're left with a needlessly patchwork situation where some G1 stuff goes on this page while other G1 stuff goes on other page, both with notes out of the wazoo. I just think merging the pages and expanding the identifier at the top would result in a better presentation. Those G1 guys are functionally "RID guys, but in Wings/IDW", anyway... [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 11:36, 7 July 2015 (EDT)
::::::Seems like a good start at least. I'd argue for listing "groups" of base modes (Micromaster Stations, Titans Return Leaders, etc.) rather than individual figures --[[User:Arren1234 |Arren Meuchel]] [[User_talk:Arren1234 |(talk)]] 20:36, 5 February 2026 (EST)
:::Functionally identical characters existing in two different continuity families is one of those weird corner cases like Sideways and should be approached as such. This is a perfect case for making rule exceptions. Having massive write-ups duplicated except for the names is silly and a waste of everyone's time, so I would suggest using the Notes section to clear up any oddities. {{unsigned|Giggidy}}
::::I fail to see how this merge would be productive. What about [[Megatron (RID)]]/[[Gigatron]]? It'll be a fine mess trying to merge those two pages. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 14:14, 7 July 2015 (EDT)
:::::Mmn, see, now that I'm seeing it goes beyond Sky-Byte, I'm not in favour of it. Sky-Byte's got that messy bit with the Legends comic on his RID page, where we have "the Sky-Byte who was in the RID cartoon" getting blasted into the Legends Universe, except he's ALSO "the Sky-Byte who originated in the G1 continuity family", so that is a bit messy and a merge or a move or something would help that. But in the case of other characters, no, I don't think it helps anything at all, and in the particular cases of Side Burn and Gigatron, it seems like an especially bad move. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 14:17, 7 July 2015 (EDT)
::::::With the recent influx of storylines involving Axiom Nexus and the multiverse, having notes indicating a character is from a specific universe traveling to another is kinda par for the course anyways. I don't see it as that big of a deal. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 14:23, 7 July 2015 (EDT)
:::::::That's not what's happening at all. Car Robots Gelshark has JG1 stuff beyond the cartoon and so does other characters from that specific continuity (Wrecker Hook, Black Convoy, and Brave Maximus). He's not travelling to a different continuity family. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 19:46, 7 July 2015 (EDT)
::::::::I posted a half-formed thought there. I meant more, if we're really inclined to make the distinction on which Sky-Byte is involved in, say the Transformers Legends pack-in comic, we can put "The Sky-Byte from Primax 43213whatever Delta came to the Legends world. My argument boils down mainly that the concept of Car Robots being part of G1 continuity as far as english-speaking audiences are concerned is little more than a footnote. But I nonetheless see the validity of your argument. It's not a bad point. But this whole merging thing would wound up more complicated an affair than just plopping everything together on one page. Some experimenting with some sandbox pages might be necessary. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 20:19, 7 July 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::Well, the idea of RID being its own continuity family/universal cluster is a footnote to begin with, no? People reading Empire of Stone don't think "this Gigatron guy is a Primax individual who is in-fiction completely distinct from the Viron Megatron who appeared in the RID cartoon". They just think it's RID Megatron in IDW continuity. It's a categorization system that exists for our personal convenience; I keep wondering if we'd be having this discussion if AAII hadn't made Viron a thing and canonized a distinction the wiki made because of reasons. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 20:55, 7 July 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::A big part of this discussion stems from the fact that Hasbro says one thing (I do remember reading somewhere that they said Robots in Disguise is its own thing before AAII) and Takara saying something else. And here we are trying to maintain that they are both right, even though they are saying things that are incompatible. That being said, RID does hold a unique position as being the first true "reboot" of the Transformers franchise (everything before had been a sequel to G1). Being a separate thing is part of its identity as a franchise in that manner. I kinda see the characters as they are now like rectangles and squares. A square is a kind of rectangle, but a rectangle isn't necessarily a square. The character on [[Sky-Byte (RID)]] is both a Viron and (in japan) a Primax character, but [[Sky-Byte (G2)]] is a Primax character that's not a Viron character. But I'll admit that this might stem from a personal bias. Maybe a new kind of tag for these pages might be the answer? Or a new format for the page? [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 21:15, 7 July 2015 (EDT)


I think there's a bigger debate to be had here. Continuity Families made an awful lot of sense a while back in terms of segmenting characters. In fact, I was strongly on the side of the 'disambiguate-by-continuity-family' debate. But I'm starting to think that this system isn't working so well anymore. Many of the friction points come when we've got two ostensibly the same guy in the same continuity family who are nothing alike. Admittedly, that's been a part of the franchise since almost day one, but it seems to be getting worse. On the other side, we're starting to get cases where you have the same guy in two different continuity families (Knockout is a very recent example) who gets two separate articles for no good reasons. This didn't used to happen, it used to be that if we had a new continuity family, then almost everyone in it was more or less brand new, sharing only perhaps an archetype. But now, guys like Gigatron show up and it's recognizably Gigatron. Or Sky-Byte. Or Breakdown. Or Rattrap (who is NOT considered a new character because Beast Wars happened before we decided on continuity families and got sorta grandfathered into G1.) Or Bulkhead. The list grows and will almost certainly continue to grow.
Agreed on the organizational aspects. And, that sandbox is a good start, though yeah, it'd need a lot of work to go through all the toylines and make a comprehensive list. There's also the fact that certain toys with base modes are intended to link to others, some universal and some just one specific bot, so it may be tricky to document when that play feature is prevelant. [[User:DrakeyC|DrakeyC]] ([[User talk:DrakeyC|talk]]) 10:35, 18 February 2026 (EST)


I'm not making any specific proposals here, but I think we should at least consider just going case-by-case and ignoring continuity families WHEN IT MAKES SENSE TO DO SO. (I'm not suggesting in any way, shape, or form that we scrap our existing organizational scheme, because goodness knows we need something and what we have works in maybe 90% of the cases.) We've already, for instance, separated out Marvel Shockwave from Sunbow Shockwave from IDW Shockwave, because they're three very different interpretations. We should at least be willing to consider allowing Knockout (G1) & Knockout (Prime) to live on the same page, because they're the same guy with the same design and the same personality. --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 21:20, 7 July 2015 (EDT)
==About character name translations==
:The Shockwaves were separated out not because of differing characterizations, but in order to ''reduce the size of some gigantic pages for multiple "legacy" characters''. It had ''nothing whatsoever'' to do with characterization. Unless you think having a separate page for a character's ''toys'' means all THOSE are somehow some "very different interpretations" of the character we consider separate from the others. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 21:29, 7 July 2015 (EDT)
Um... I'm new here. I have a question, and I'm not sure if this question falls under [[Help:Official info]]...
::Which works out to be exactly the same thing. We break where there's a logical break point when it makes sense to do so. Or have you not noticed that, say, Grimlock's Marvel page also includes things like Regeneration One and Classics, or his cartoon page includes the Japanese G1 continuity and Wings. It's clearly not JUST space, because many of those little sub-sections are tiny. Offshoot and splinter timeline versions of those characters are kept together. Which is entirely sensible.--[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 21:36, 7 July 2015 (EDT)
:::I'm not going as far as to say that the Knock Outs should be merged. I'm only arguing for the RID characters because of the overlap that already exists. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 22:52, 7 July 2015 (EDT)
At the very least, we could take this opportunity to sort out whether this kind thing should be modeled after [[Fortress Maximus (RID)|Fortress/Brave Maximus]]'s page (keeping both the English Viron and Japanese Primax versions on the same page) or after [[Wrecker Hook]]'s page (separating the Japanese Primax version onto it own page from the [[Tow-Line (RID)|English Viron version]]), as those two instances are very much polar opposite solutions for the same type of character (as each and as Sky-Byte). Currently, Sky-Byte (RID) is like Fort/Brave Max's page, but if it's to be changed to be more like Wrecker Hook's (i.e. - creating a separate "Gelshark" page), then would the same happen to Fort/Brave Maximus? Or if we keep Sky-Byte's page as is, would that stand to reason that, by the same logic, Wrecker Hook's page should be merged back in with Tow-Line's? --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 21:51, 7 July 2015 (EDT)
:I think Wrecker Hook is the one case where it ''should'' definitively be merged. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 22:52, 7 July 2015 (EDT)
::<s>I second that motion.</s> Reconsidering my position on this. Considering maybe making some sandbox mock-ups for proposals. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 22:58, 7 July 2015 (EDT)


== A new proposal, this time to help along with this whole "Iocus" nonsense ==
That is, I want to add the translated names of some characters. But I want to know what basis this wiki uses to choose foreign translations. Must the foreign translations be ones used by Hasbro and/or TakaraTomy and their licensees in order to remain on this wiki? Can some of the names translated by fan Chinese translation groups be considered valid? Especially in cases where they were the first to provide a translation for a work (possibly the only one) and fixed certain character names.


I'm currently at work, so I won't be able to post up a mock-up until tomorrow afternoon, probably, but I've thought up another proposal, as the back-and-forth over "Iocus" characters, such as the hero mashers and Bot Shots is, apparently, still the source of debate. I'm not big on simply recycling the idea I had for Sideways, but maybe it'll satisfy now just as it did then. So for "Iocus" incarnation of characters, I propose that we create a new section on their disambiguation pages. It would have a short write-up along the lines of:
There are also some characters (such as [[Sentinel Maximus]]) whose works may never be introduced by licensors in certain languages, but they do have a commonly used translated name. Should we include this translated name, or just keep it without a translation in that language?


''"The following representations of Ironhide are not necessarily meant to represent any one specific incarnation of the character, but should be taken as a representation of the "Ironhide" archetype as a broader concept. In [[Transtech|fiction]] and [[List of universal streams|meta-fictional]] settings where a strict categorization of Ironhide's incarnations is necessary, these representations of Ironhide are said to be part of the [[Iocus]] cluster. Ironhide's [[Kre-O]] incarnation is also said to be part of the Iocus cluster, but those are relegated to their own page (listed above) due to being more fleshed out in nature."''
For example, when IDW comic books were introduced in China, the translation team at the time translated [[Tarn (G1)]] as '''璇玑湖'''. So this would count as an authorized translation. However, because this translated name has nothing to do with the original meaning (as well as some other controversies surrounding that Chinese translation group), the more common and widely used Chinese translation for [[Tarn (G1)]] is the direct transliteration '''塔恩'''. '''璇玑湖''' has basically been abandoned. In this case, which translation should we choose?


There would then be a sub-section for game appearances (since Bot-Shots had a game accompanying the toys) and a list of the toys/merchandise that are appropriate to the section. I would still recommend we keep a link on certain pages that redirect to this list on, for this example, Ironhide's G1 and Movie toy pages. It would just be a short blurb telling readers to go see the list on the Disambig page.
:I suddenly realized that 塔恩 could be used. The packaging of Blokees does indeed call him 塔恩.


Thoughts on this? I'll start working on the mock-up tomorrow, or I'll start working on thinking up an alternative proposal if I get mostly negative feedback on this one. Hopefully we can put this whole thing behind us soon, and concentrate our energies once more on recording fiction and whatnot. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 02:32, 28 July 2015 (EDT)
Also, does the foreign name used in the product titles by the Hasbro official flagship store count?
:Kre-O is Fornax, not Iocus. In any case, I don't agree with this; filling up the disambiguation pages with content beyond, well, disambiguations seems like a bad idea, and I don't think it'd have any benefit that wouldn't also result from keeping the Iocus pages. [[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 05:39, 28 July 2015 (EDT)
::Yeah, disambiguation pages are for disambiguation, not for sticking toys and fiction on. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 06:46, 28 July 2015 (EDT)
:::Duly noted. I'm retracting my proposal then. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 08:32, 28 July 2015 (EDT)


:New plan:
Uh, this question might seem a bit silly, or it might come across as a bit strange because I'm speaking English through a translator. But if the existing Wiki rules already cover this issue, please just tell me, thank you.[[User:Micheva|Micheva]] ([[User talk:Micheva|talk]]) 10:18, 12 February 2026 (EST)
:Step 1) bring back the dedicated pages for the Iocus cluster <airquote> "characters" </airquote>. Possibly harmonizing all of their disambig tags (to Iocus or Merchandising or Sideline or...), with generous helpings of redirects.
:This is a fantastic question. I have no authority here so don’t take this as word of law, but I believe that Romanizations on this wiki (which I think is somewhat similar) are case-by-case. The first romanization of [[Deathsaurus (G1)|Deathsaurus]] was “Deszarus”, but the page is still titled “Deathsaurus” because that’s what the name actually is supposed to be. (Deathsaurus’ name issues are actually pretty interesting, at least to me, and I’d recommend reading the wiki article’s section on it.) Conversely, [[Jallguar]] IS the first romanization used, and the article title, but in that instance I suppose that there isn’t really any convincing reason to use any of the other romanizations we’ve gotten over the years since none of them actually mean anything (it’s just the Japanese word for Jaguar with an extra syllable inserted). I’m rambling. What I would do for foreign names is, stick with the first official translation used, unless you think there’s a compelling reason to use a different one (like what you said with Tarn), and in that case bring it up on the discussion page for the article in question or in the Discord server. [[User:Cylasbreakdown|Cylasbreakdown]] ([[User talk:Cylasbreakdown|talk]]) 02:43, 15 February 2026 (EST)
:Step 2) put link out sections on the pages of any character that a particular Bot Shot (Hero Masher, Construct Bot, etc) was designed after. These would be in the toy sections, have a picture and a "for information on the Bot Shot toy designed to look like this character click here" notice." There would be no description of the toy or its history of redecos on these more mainstream character pages to prevent data drift. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 09:11, 28 July 2015 (EDT)
::They need to be translations used in official material. That's just the easiest line in the sand we can make. If different translations are used officially, we note them all, barring obvious typos and the such. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 05:22, 15 February 2026 (EST)
::Whatever solution we come up with, I just don't want this wiki to ignore something that's... well, official, I guess. I understand that lots of people dislike the idea of "Iocus" as a universal cluster, but since it's established as an official concept by "Ask Vector Prime," there's no turning a blind eye to it. We can't just decide to ignore something official because of our personal tastes. There's lots of other things Ask Vector Prime established that have proved... divisive. We haven't ignored them, so why start now? [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 09:34, 28 July 2015 (EDT)
:::Does the name used for the flagship store count? Those works that were not introduced have kept them without translations, right?[[User:Micheva|Micheva]] ([[User talk:Micheva|talk]]) 06:52, 15 February 2026 (EST)
:::That's my big thing, too. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 09:51, 28 July 2015
::I'd be okay with that. It'd help with the issue of ambiguous continuity characters without duplicating information, too. [[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 10:12, 28 July 2015 (EDT)
::::I don't think that we're ignoring Iocus because we don't like it. I think were trying to treat it as it was designed, which seems at least partially to reduce wiki clutter. Also maybe to deal with all the questions about "what's the home universe of Optimash" and the like. It really doesn't seem to be it's own place, much like Axiom Nexus isn't. It'd mostly a place where other universe versions of guys go to be strange. Hero Mashers or Bot Shots or Battle Masters. We don't make a page for Needlenose [TransTech] just because he's in Axiom Nexus fiction. Maybe it's fine not to do it go G1 Starscream who just happens to be a Hero Masher. But, following that line of reasoning, maybe it is OK to have a few pages for guys who are so amalgamated that they have no clear universe. Battle Masters certainly seems to have its own esthetic. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 10:21, 28 July 2015 (EDT)
:::::Yeah, this return to moving stuff to existing characters was prompting by Attacktix being declared Iocus, which are all very unambiguously based on specific existing characters. I think the description of "Iocus is populated by gimmicky versions of characters from other families" is quite apt, and I'd say that putting stuff on existing character articles is the best way to deal with it. I mean, we've already been doing that with Q-Transformers, which is very much "these movie and G1 and so on guys all just coexist here and that's normal" rather than being any sort of multi-dimensional crossover deal. In the cases where the inspiration is clear-cut, then it's far more helpful for the uninformed user to be able to find these ancillary toys on the appropriate page (rather than them being hidden off on a page full of all sorts of random stuff), and where they're more of an amalgam, then I agree with Sipher that simply duplicating listings is the best course of action. Probably the one thing where I might argue an exception could be made is Battle Masters, since the majority of them (barring Optimus, Bumblebee, Grimlock, etc.) bear nearly no resemblance to previous versions of the chaaracters. [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]]) 10:36, 28 July 2015 (EDT)
::::::Also, Sorenson himself came out against moving all the Attacktix guys to the Iocus pages. (Mr. Sorenson, if you're reading this, apologies, I know you're not a fan of Authorial Intent.) So he isn't acting as if he feels his work is being disrespected. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 10:46, 28 July 2015 (EDT)
::::::How does putting them on the inspiration character's page help more than putting them on their own page? If I knew very little about Transformers but had a Bot Shot of Ironhide why would I ever look on the [[Ironhide (G1)]] page for information about it? Yes, we as fans are aware of these homages but to an outsider the most logical place to look for information on Bot Shots Ironhide would probably be somewhere like "Ironhide (Bot Shots)". --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 11:04, 28 July 2015 (EDT)
:::::::Oh, I was talking about the reverse - if somebody is, say, looking for toys of G1 Rodimus, it would be helpful for Hero Mashers Rodimus, which is inarguably a toy of G1 Rodimus, to be on the G1 Rodimus article, rather than squirreled away on a different article. I get what you're saying, but with the same logic, could one not argue that, say, RID15 Bumblebee ought to go on a separate article to Prime Bumblebee to make it easier for people to learn about his RID15 toys? [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]]) 12:46, 28 July 2015 (EDT)
::::::::1)That's why I advocated leaving the link out sections. 2)This is where the "generous helpings of redirects" come in. I have always thought that we needed more redirects for when a character in one franchise is released in another. That is, [[Hot Shot (Armada)]], [[Hot Shot (Energon)]] and [[Hot Shot (Cybertron)]] should all exist and link to the same page. 3)So "why not just redirect to 'Blankity-blank (G1)', then?" Because the one real piece of information we have about them says that they are not G1, but Iocus. And that "inarguably" is quite arguable because of that simple fact.--[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 12:56, 28 July 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::Locus is meant to put all that Bot Shots, Construct-Bots things to the same contiunity named "Iocus". Like Primax being G1. For example all versions of G1 Optimus Prime is placed on a single page, so why not do the same to the Iocus characters? Like placing all Iocus versions of Optimus Prime to a single page. Prime Bumblebee is based on the appearance of Movie Bumblebee but he's not the same character and thereof, not shares the same page. Bot Shot Acid Storm is based on his G1 appearance but he's a different character too. It's the same.--[[User:Primestar3|Primestar3]] ([[User talk:Primestar3|talk]]) 15:25, 29 July 2015 (EDT)


== Links to other wikis ==
Some publications that contain many translations (such as the Chinese version of DW's MTMTE) I actually don't have the resources for, which is a pity.
I have come to realize some issues. For instance, if the translation team used a certain translation term when translating a publication, but later discovered that this term was incorrect, they made the correction in their subsequent fan-based translations. However, since the publication was not re-released after its introduction, the translation term in the authorized merchandise could not be modified. Can we adopt the revised translation term provided by this translation team?


Browsing the site, I've noticed that the various Star Wars-related pages have a nifty little template that takes the clicker over to Wookieepedia. Would it be a bad idea if I made similar redirect boxes for properties that have been involved with major and/or repeated crossovers with Transformers? (I'm thinking Marvel, Angry Birds, maaaaaybe Animorphs.) Or is this something that we don't do anymore? [[User:Grum|Grum]] ([[User talk:Grum|talk]]) 21:23, 4 August 2015 (EDT)
There is another less rigorous question: Does THE translation given by the authorized Chinese translation and introduction team of Chris McFeely's TRANSFORMERS: THE BASICS count?[[User:Micheva|Micheva]] ([[User talk:Micheva|talk]]) 07:07, 15 February 2026 (EST)
:I'd be down for this. I've always really like the Wookiepedia template, expanding the idea to other wikis, within reason, seems like a good idea. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 21:41, 4 August 2015 (EDT)
:THE BASICS, while incredibly informative, is not official, so no, it would not count. [[User:Cylasbreakdown|Cylasbreakdown]] ([[User talk:Cylasbreakdown|talk]]) 15:52, 16 February 2026 (EST)
:Part of the reason we did this was because Derik wrangled an informal partnership between the sites (Wookieepedia has a link to us on their main page). Not sure if we should worry about doing so with the other sites as well before adding custom templates for them (I see Marvel Wiki already has some links to us too). --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 22:06, 4 August 2015 (EDT)
::I reiterate, official material only. Mistakes are unfortunate, but that's how it goes and we can't presume unofficial translations will make it into official material. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 17:42, 16 February 2026 (EST)
::Should Wikipedia itself be also included if this template project is to go through? [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 22:19, 4 August 2015 (EDT)
OK, I will do it this way. Strictly follow the official materials.
:::I wouldn't be opposed to it, but there'd be a ton of pages to add it to. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 22:49, 4 August 2015 (EDT)
::::We'll take it one Wiki at a time. If someone else can make the templates, I'll help out updating the appropriate pages, I don't mind the workload. It just might take a while, is all. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 22:56, 4 August 2015 (EDT)
:::::The important thing to remember, I think, is whether the other wikis are ''worth'' linking to. We link to Wookieepedia because it's an exhaustive resource, but there's a reason we don't link to the G.I. Joe wiki. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 11:55, 5 August 2015 (EDT)
I threw together a [[User:Grum/Sandbox|quick mockup]] of a Marvel redirect template. I'm not entirely sure of the red; I just did that so that it could be quickly distinguished from the Wookieepedia template. I might do Angry Birds too, because that one probably isn't going away for a while. [[User:Grum|Grum]] ([[User talk:Grum|talk]]) 10:13, 5 August 2015 (EDT)


==Email marked as spam==
And one more question: Can the translation names used by Hasbro's official store be used in this Wiki?[[User:Micheva|Micheva]] ([[User talk:Micheva|talk]]) 23:40, 16 February 2026 (EST)
:Material from Hasbro is fine. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 01:50, 17 February 2026 (EST)


Hello, this is my first time editing so forgive me if I do it wrong, but I just wanted to let the admins know that the confirmation Email was marked as spam, at least for me. Sorry if this has already been addressed, but I didn't want to go digging through the entire archive looking for the topic. [[User:Wheelpath|Wheelpath]] ([[User talk:Wheelpath|talk]]) 21:05, 5 August 2015 (EDT)
== So when are we splitting the Legends World characters off? ==
:That's up to your email client, not us. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 21:10, 5 August 2015 (EDT)
::Huh, well okay then, thanks. [[User:Wheelpath|Wheelpath]] ([[User talk:Wheelpath|talk]]) 21:28, 5 August 2015 (EDT)
:::Many email clients will have a button or link so you can mark emails as not spam, and also in many if you add the email address into your address book it'll override your spam filter. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 21:58, 5 August 2015 (EDT)
::::Yeah, I fixed the issue by selecting the name and choosing to 'report as not spam'. Thanks for the tips, I hope other newbies can avoid this problem. [[User:Wheelpath|Wheelpath]] ([[User talk:Wheelpath|talk]]) 22:57, 5 August 2015 (EDT)


==Upvoting or whatever else it's called==
It made sense to keep them together when ''Legends'' first started as Jungle Animals in Decidedly Non-Jungle Situations, and this wasn't worth pursuing before now since it'd be just moving the furniture around.  But the lore got deeper and now with ''New Legends'' as ongoing fiction I think it's worth looking at again.  As much as Legends World is treated as its own dimension, it is fundamentally just a location easily accessible from the JG1 timeline populated with clones* of Transformers from the wider continuity that exists around it.  And when we write pages for duplicate characters who co-exist, do we not typically split them off?  If that's the yardstick, several Legends Worlders interact with or refer to their JG1 selves, including Rattrap, Rhinox, Waspinator, Arcee, and T-AI.  Leo Prime even moves in with Lio Convoy, and keeping those same dudes on the same page is complicating the already complex timeline presented by "[[Age of Primes (End of G1 Universe)|Age of Primes]]". — [[User:TheLastGherkin|TheLastGherkin]] ([[User talk:TheLastGherkin|talk]]) 12:44, 3 March 2026 (EST)
<sub>*"clones" is a simpler term for these guys than "magically created lifeforms in a telepathic dream world based on real people from 300 years in the future" but same diff</sub>
:It's always been strange to me that they weren't split off already. Having them on the same page is extremely confusing. I'd say go for it. --[[User:Arren1234 |Arren Meuchel]] [[User_talk:Arren1234 |(talk)]] 12:57, 3 March 2026 (EST)
:Personally I think this might be overthinking things. I'd agree that it's not quite 1 to 1 with other cross dimension stuff, but functionally Legends Rattrap is a version of the Beast Wars character even if he is in this weird pocket dimension type thing, and ever single "native" to the dimension we see is basically just a comedic version of a pre-existing character. And we've always kept cross dimensional stories with versions of the same character on the same page (Universe, TransTech, et cetera). It makes things complicated, sure, but JG1 stuff has been like that for nearly two decades now. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 13:00, 3 March 2026 (EST)
::For my money, there's just ''so much'' with the Legends idiots now, and there's going to keep being more of it, so we'd be best off siloing them into their own pages <s>and not having to think about them any more</s>. Universe and TransTech stories that had the characters interacting were generally one-offs or short runs. This is a Cloud or Galvatron II situation, to me. --[[User:Broadside|Broadside]] ([[User talk:Broadside|talk]]) 13:45, 3 March 2026 (EST)
:I am on the record as considering reader experience our prime directive and this would be such a drastic improvement to the readability of our coverage of the Legends rat's nest that I've been meaning to suggest it for years. Consider me emphatically in favor. --[[User:AzimuthAcolyte|AzimuthAcolyte]] ([[User talk:AzimuthAcolyte|talk]]) 20:12, 3 March 2026 (EST)
:I think I'm also generally leaning towards "this is already complicated and it's just going to get more complicated so let's detangle this shit sooner rather than later." -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 20:19, 3 March 2026 (EST)
::Fine with this idea. Are we using Japanese names since those characters have never shown up in material with Hasbro names? [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 20:31, 3 March 2026 (EST)
:::That feels unnecessarily pedantic. --[[User:Broadside|Broadside]] ([[User talk:Broadside|talk]]) 22:16, 3 March 2026 (EST)
::::One could make the argument that it's too steeped in Japanese fan culture/terminology to use the Hasbro names, but I really only care about the human characters having Japanese names (because they're normal people living in Tokyo and wouldn't be named things like "T-AI"). [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 22:25, 3 March 2026 (EST)
:::::Also, I think Roadbuster, Whirl, and Windblade can stay as they are, since all three are meant to be the main JG1 versions of those characters anyway. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 22:37, 3 March 2026 (EST)
:::I'm theoretically in favour of Japanese names, since it would improve legibility of say, the time Rattle and Rattrap teamed up – and we're absolutely keeping Lio Convoy, since Leo Prime has gone through a textual name change – BUT: characters with toys, at least, had both the Japanese and Hasbro names on their packaging.  It would be inconsistent to have Rattrap and Waspinator and Optimus Primal alongside Cheetus and — I can't think of another example, but I'm interrupting this train of thought because I CAN think of Optimus Minor being made Primal's son on the basis of Beast Convoy's western name.  And how many minor guys like, I dunno, Build Boy, are named in dialogue?  We could always title the article Wedge and slap a Noname-uncomfirmed on that bad boy like how we did with ''Shattered Glass'' in the distant past.
:::Also, what are we feeling is best for a disambig?  (Legends)?  (LG)?  (LW)? — [[User:TheLastGherkin|TheLastGherkin]] ([[User talk:TheLastGherkin|talk]]) 04:43, 4 March 2026 (EST)
::::Or we could go with the Kre-O approach of "major characters get their own pages, cameos don't" I GUESS — [[User:TheLastGherkin|TheLastGherkin]] ([[User talk:TheLastGherkin|talk]]) 04:53, 4 March 2026 (EST)
::::Minor is only called "Minor" in Legends, so he wouldn't get the full name. I vote (Legends). [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 05:01, 4 March 2026 (EST)
:::::I second the "(Legends)" motion. It's the name of the franchise these character debuted in, in the name of the world they live in, and it's one word. We don't put Masterforce characters at "MF", for instance, and "Legends" isn't even a compound word that ''could'' be abbreviated. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 16:32, 4 March 2026 (EST)
::::::Doing a cursory sweep we appear to have already used "(Legends)" for a [[:Category:Transformers Legends episodes|bazillion mobile game events]] such that it might be prudent to avoid that one. My two cents would be to either use the "(LG)" abbreviation from the packaging/story titles/etc or straight up spell out "(Legends World)" for absolute maximum clarity. --[[User:AzimuthAcolyte|AzimuthAcolyte]] ([[User talk:AzimuthAcolyte|talk]]) 17:50, 4 March 2026 (EST)
::::::I'm leaning towards LG: it's on every toy box and in the title of the vast majority of chapters.  Plus, Deadlock uses it in-universe.  And it's shorter! — [[User:TheLastGherkin|TheLastGherkin]] ([[User talk:TheLastGherkin|talk]]) 18:02, 4 March 2026 (EST)
:::::::"Legends" is also spoken in-universe countless times all throughout the Legends manga series, even in the most recent End of G1 Universe comic starring the green Lio Convoy. The reason "LG" is on every toy box is because it's part of each toy's ID number, which we have never let dictate any of our disambiguation tags. Otherwise, we'd be using "(BT)" instead of "(Binaltech)", "(MP)" instead of "(Masterpiece)", "(UN)" instead of "(United)", "(TG)" instead of "(Generations)", "(TAV)" instead of "(Adventure)", "(PP)" for Power of the Primes instead of "(POTP)", "(SG)" instead of "(Siege)", "(TCV)" instead of "(Cyberverse)", "(ER)" instead of "(Earthrise)", "(KD)" instead of "(Kingdom)", "(TL)" instead of "(Legacy)", etc. That [[Transformers Legends (mobile game)|Transformers Legends mobile game]] (which has been dead for over a decade, even) that "(Legends)" is currently being used for is a nonissue when "(Legends)" is ''also'' currently being used for things from the [[Transformers Legends (book)|Transformers Legends anthology book]], particularly [[Susan (Legends)]]. And "(Legends)" has already been in use for things from the Legends manga, too, like [[Groundshaker (Legends)]], [[Synapse (Legends)]], [[Duncan (Legends)]], and [[Plasma Energy Chamber (Legends)]]. It's no different from how we use "(RID)" for things from both the 2001 and 2025 franchises, "(Universe)" for things from both the 2003 and 2008 franchises, and "(Generations)" for things from both the pre-Combiner Wars toyline and from the series of Japanese guidebooks. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 00:37, 5 March 2026 (EST)
::::::::Yes, the principle was always "least disambiguation necessary for titles". A particular disambiguation is fine to be used by different things. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 02:13, 5 March 2026 (EST)
:::::::::Speaking personally I cannot say I am terribly invested in any specific disambig so if y'all feel that strongly about "(Legends)," so be it. --[[User:AzimuthAcolyte|AzimuthAcolyte]] ([[User talk:AzimuthAcolyte|talk]]) 15:00, 5 March 2026 (EST)
:Historically I've leaned more in the direction of "this feels like putting these dumb animals on too much of a pedestal", given the meta-importance that page splits tend to imply to the wiki's audience, ''but'' I find the "these are functionally clones who exist within JG1 continuity specifically, not just 'normal' alternate versions of the characters" framing pretty compelling, so I'm surprising myself by saying I wouldn't be opposed to a split at this point. Making stuff like multiple Lios Convoy interacting less insane to write about is definitely a bonus too. [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]]) 04:34, 4 March 2026 (EST)
::Oh, also, and I hope it would go without saying, but obviously the toys that technically represent Transformerised Legends World guys would need to go on both pages (which I think we're already doing anyway for cases like the Targetmasters that are actually technically Kiss Players and Beastformers and stuff). [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]]) 04:41, 4 March 2026 (EST)


Sorry to bother again, but next to edits I've been seeing +# or -# and I was wondering how to do that? I decided to check Wikipedia to see if it was borrowed from there, but I couldn't find anything about it. Granted, I didn't really know what to look for. [[User:Wheelpath|Wheelpath]] ([[User talk:Wheelpath|talk]]) 01:47, 6 August 2015 (EDT)
Thinking about it more, the Galvatron II example is more presuasive to me; a suite style situation would be fine. As for names, I don't really care about T-AI but for any of the Transformers I think that's a bit much. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 08:08, 4 March 2026 (EST)
:That's the number of bytes added to or removed from an article. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 01:55, 6 August 2015 (EDT)
::Oh, Well I guess this was unnecessary then. [[User:Wheelpath|Wheelpath]] ([[User talk:Wheelpath|talk]]) 01:56, 6 August 2015 (EDT)


Having gone through [[:Category:Legends World natives]] and [[:Category:Legends World humans]], if we apply the Kre-O Rule of Notability, that gives us the following:
*'''Split:''' Airazor, Arcee, Big Convoy, Bighorn, Blackarachnia, Cheetor, Dinobot, Lio Convoy, Lio Junior, Megatron, Nightscream, Optimus Minor, Optimus Primal, Rattrap, Rhinox, Scorponok, Scuba, Scylla, Silverbolt, Stampy, Starscream, Tarantulas, Terrorsaur, Tigatron, Waspinator, Nightbeat, T-AI
*'''Lump:''' Roadbuster, Whirl, basically every real person making a cameo
*'''Small roles:''' Archadis, Armordillo, BB, Break, Bump, Colada, Diver, Drill Nuts, Gas Skunk, Guiledart, Heinrad, Ikard, Inferno, Longrack, Magmatron, Megastorm, Kobanzametarō, Prowl, Quickstrike, Rampage, Randy, Ravage, Saberback, Sling, Star Upper, Tasmania Kid, Transmutate, Venom, Wedge, Wolfang, Kelly, Kenneth Onishi, Koji Onishi
*'''TBD:''' Botanica (doesn't have a write-up yet), Buzz Saw (does not appear in JG1 elsewhere), Savage and Noble, Tank Drones (do we split subgroups?)
— [[User:TheLastGherkin|TheLastGherkin]] ([[User talk:TheLastGherkin|talk]]) 09:02, 4 March 2026 (EST)
:The Kre-O thing is because some characters (in fiction or toys) can't be exclusively slotted into G1 or movie buckets since they shift design cues between them. I think it's easier to just be consistent with the Legends gremlin people (other than real people cameos). Sensible to keep the sentient toys (Mini-Cons, Encore Big Convoy) and the three JG1 inductees (Roadbuster, Whirl, Windblade) on their respective character pages, I think. Like Wolfang/Howlinger, Buzz Saw exists in JG1 somewhere off-camera, since they got his toy. I don't think Tank Drone needs another page; it's a mass-produced bodytype that can cover instances across universes, not a specific person. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 09:19, 4 March 2026 (EST)
::I'm somewhere in the middle between "splitting them off the main article would help improve readability, yes," and "splitting them off entirely feels a bit too far since all of them are essentially just different versions of the main Beast Wars et al characters", so I think going the aforementioned route of suiting them would be the cleanest solution. Keeps them joined at the hip with the main versions that they're basically new versions of, while also giving them their own webpages to tidy up readability on the main pages. The Galvatron II analogy is very apropos in this case. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 10:01, 4 March 2026 (EST)
::Coming back to this with refreshed knowledge, Botanica is split, Buzz Saw is small roles (which is now also split), Savage and Noble are split both from Noble (BM) and from each other, and Rhinox/Tankor can go on the same page. — [[User:TheLastGherkin|TheLastGherkin]] ([[User talk:TheLastGherkin|talk]]) 18:02, 4 March 2026 (EST)


==Reorganising Regeneration One==
So uh. I've come around on the split pages. However...I don't think completely removing any reference to them on the Beast Wars pages themselves is particularly helpful? Whether it be a suite or a "see this article for more information" I don't mind, but there should be some reference since like Sabrblade says, they are just comedic versions of the Beast Wars guys. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 07:37, 6 March 2026 (EST)
:Maybe do the disambiguation like this? [[User:Cylasbreakdown|Cylasbreakdown]] ([[User talk:Cylasbreakdown|talk]]) 14:09, 6 March 2026 (EST) {{disambig3.5|the Beast Wars Maximal|his Legends World counterpart|Rattrap (Legends)|Rattrap}}


User [[User:Saix|Saix]] has proposed that some of the Regeneration One sections should get moved out of "Marvel Comics continuity": specifically, characters, teams and concepts that only appeared in the UK comics and Generation 2, as they aren't from the US run that RG1 is sequel to and their stories aren't linked. What do people think? [[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 23:13, 11 August 2015 (GMT)
:Seems needlessly complicated. It'd be a lot of work for dubious benefit. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 18:22, 11 August 2015 (EDT)
::It only applies to about a dozen pages that don't have the Marvel US -> RG1 link and it's not a whole lot of work. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 18:54, 11 August 2015 (EDT)
:::It is still an extra complication though: the stories continuing Marvel continuity are now not counted as part of a Marvel continuity but separated into their own thing? [[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 07:59, 12 August 2015 (GMT)
::::Couldn't that just be solved with a "Regeneration One is a continuation of Marvel US but not anything else" note template, rather than making the super-false declaration that they are no longer in Marvel continuity?  --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 03:14, 12 August 2015 (EDT)
::::::How is omitting "Marvel Comics continuity"—meant to indicate a continuous narrative for a character—a false declaration while collecting unrelated characterizations under the same header isn't? Lots of articles have just one section, like "Armada cartoon"; is it a false declaration that we don't use an extraneous "Cartoon continuity" header? [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 13:29, 12 August 2015 (EDT)
:::::And we've already got one of those. [[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 11:41, 12 August 2015 (GMT)
:I will point out here that Saix's proposal is similar to how the Wiki treats the G1 cartoon at the moment. If a character appeared in the first 95 episodes, there's a overall G1 Cartoon continuity header, followed by subheaders for ''The Transformers'' cartoon and Japanese cartoon continuity. If the character only debuted after the split, like [[Chromedome (G1)|Chromedome]], then American continuity and Japanese continuity are two separate but equal headers, not grouped together as part of the overall G1 cartoon. For characters like [[Blacker]], his appearances in ''Victory'' and ''Wings'' are completely disconnected, with no indication that both are splinter continuities of the main cartoon branch.
:I disagree with Saix and the cartoon format. I think all G1 cartoon streams should be clustered together and identified as such, and all Marvel streams should be as well. But perhaps more importantly, the Wiki should follow a consistent theme -- all one or all the other, yes? --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 07:38, 12 August 2015 (EDT)
::I've said it here before and I've no doubt I'll say it here again: "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds..." -Ralph Waldo Emerson. Not that there's no place for consistency, but making a bad choice in one arena because we've made a similar choice in another is still a bad choice. Most of our users care far more about being able to quickly and accurately find the information they're looking for than if what's being done on one page matches up with what's being done on another.
::As for the specifics, obviously, keep the RG1 stuff as close to the Marvel US / UK / G2 / Classics stuff as possible. I don't think this needs to be generalized to the much more complicated and varied G1 cartoon tree. I'm not sure if it should or shouldn't be, but I am sure that the cartoon situation is a lot more complicated and needs a lot more thought.
::Oh, and PS, for the record, the tangentially-relevant [[Ask Vector Prime]] that's going to hit in a few hours was written and scheduled weeks ago--[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 08:52, 12 August 2015 (EDT)
:::Why is it the job of character pages to detail continuity relations that are irrelevant to the subject? [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 13:29, 12 August 2015 (EDT)
::::Because they're not irrelevant. RG1 and ''Wings'' are not full continuities onto themselves -- the underlying framework of the stories comes from the main cartoon or Marvel universe. No character article exists in a vacuum.  Even if RG1 Springer himself has no previous history in the US Marvel timeline, >90% of the other characters and concepts he's interacting with do. Putting it under the Marvel Comics header gives readers the overall context necessary to interpret everything in Springer's history other than him. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 13:55, 12 August 2015 (EDT)
::::::We have pedantic templates that spell out the continuity now. And, again, we don't do this for every piecemeal continuity section that's in isolation on a page. Beast Machines cartoon sections aren't automatically under "Beast Wars cartoon continuity", Energon cartoon sections aren't automatically under "Unicron Trilogy cartoon continuity", etc. What makes Regeneration One so goshdarned special if it happens to be on the same page as other MG1 branches? Your logic doesn't follow. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 15:30, 12 August 2015 (EDT)
:::::::The Beast Machines and Energon cartoon sections are usually under "Cartoon continuity" (with Beast Wars/Armada respectively).[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 23:47, 12 August 2015 (GMT)
::::::::"In isolation". [[Jetstorm (BM)]], one of many examples, doesn't have a "Cartoon continuity" header because it's pointless clutter. Why do only the Marvel offshoots require the "overall context" that justifies the header? [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 19:20, 12 August 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::Jetstorm doesn't ''exist'' in ''Beast Wars''! Arguing that characters who are only in RG1 and no other Marvel-based continuity is a different argument to saying it about Jhiaxus, the Wreckers, or the Mayhem Attack Squad. [[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 07:54, 13 August 2015 (GMT)
:::::Saix, let me turn this around on you. You're strongly advocating for a reorg against mostly uniform opposition or indifference. So what advantage do you see to a new schema? --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 14:42, 12 August 2015 (EDT)
::::::I thought I made that clear already. G2 Jhiaxus and RG1 Jhiaxus have nothing to do with each other and do not belong together. There's no continuity or narrative between the two brances, regardless of the fact that they come from the same tree, and putting them under the same header pushes a false impression. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 15:30, 12 August 2015 (EDT)
:::::::G2 Jhiaxus is the leader of a faction of Cybertronians operating out of a series of interconnected mechaformed planets called the Hub in a series written by Simon Furman to continue the story told in the US G1 series, while RG1 Jhiaxus is the leader of a faction of Cybertronians operating out of a series of interconnected mechaformed planets called the Hub in a series written by Simon Furman to continue the story told in the US G1 series. I can see why you'd be arguing that they're dissimilar, I mean it's not as if they look identical too. --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] ([[User talk:Emvee|talk]]) 15:57, 12 August 2015 (EDT)
::::::::So they're in the same continuity? Or is this strawman supposed to have another point? [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 17:34, 12 August 2015 (EDT)
::::::::: They branch out from identical starting points, though. Moving one piece of fiction out of the Marvel section while keeping others in seems like it will needlessly obfuscate things. [[User:Grum|Grum]] ([[User talk:Grum|talk]]) 18:32, 12 August 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::That's not what anybody is arguing. This is a discussion over having sections under "Marvel Comics continuity", even when none of those sections on a page have anything to do with each other. If an article only has some combination of G2, Classics, or RG1 without Marvel US G1, then I'm arguing they shouldn't be mushed together as if there were some narrative thread. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 18:43, 12 August 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::: And in the case of Jhiaxus, don't some of his RG1 details qualify as offscreen G1 events that therefore apply to G2 Jhiaxus's background? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 18:33, 12 August 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::No. The RG1 backstory only applies to RG1 and makes no sense with G2. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 18:43, 12 August 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::I think we all understand your argument. We just aren't persuaded by it. And you haven't really ever answered my point about the advantage of upending the existing system. The closest you've come is that you feel that the two interpretations of Jhiaxus have nothing to do with each other and you'd like to separate them with other stories. I don't find that a compelling argument. All else being equal, inertia alone would suggest we not make this change. And all else isn't equal, we've heard plenty of arguments about keeping them together. Unless there's something of substance to be added that's been missed, I think we can all reasonably consider this proposal tabled. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 18:50, 12 August 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::What was it I said about being imperious, again? But keep on insisting I haven't elucidated my position and making appeals to tradition, I guess. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 19:20, 12 August 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::Actually, I'm saying just the opposite. You have made your point, and as far as I can tell Charles, Walky, Sorenson, Grum, Emvee, S.H.I.E.L.D. Xaaron, and myself seem unconvinced. But keep on regurgitating the same arguments. It's a wonderfully productive use of everyone's time. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:42, 12 August 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::You are free to leave the discussion if it bothers you so. Or you can actually address my points instead of constantly saying I didn't make any. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 20:09, 12 August 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::Nobody else is into this.  Quit cluttering up the recent changes page.  --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 20:40, 12 August 2015 (EDT)


== Fire in the Dark characters ==
Alright, I've decided that for now I'm just going to add a note and a link mostly because I have little patience when it comes to formatting suite links. It's going to be along these lines:


Now that "[[Fire in the Dark]]" continuity has been classified as a Primax-influenced Aurex universe, what shall we do about the Maximal and Predacon characters from the story? Keep the details on the G1 characters' pages or make new Armada pages for them? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 17:44, 13 August 2015 (EDT)
{{note|Due to the unique nature of ''Legends'' place within JG1 continuity, we've opted to separate out this version of the character into its own micro-page. See [article link] for more details.}}
:As always, I think it's really silly to make pages for "X (UT) is just like X (BW) except he's from the Unicron Trilogy." Inferno makes a little sense because he has a toy and fought in the Universe War. But most of these guys, I'd say no. But I'm almost always in the minority on that.--[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 17:59, 13 August 2015 (EDT)
:: I agree with Giggidy here. We'll probably never ever revisit this universe again and it seems pointless to make tiny article stubs for every BW character that appeared in the story... especially when it seems like the only reason for any of this is because the author didn't do a lot of research on continuity. [[User:Grum|Grum]] ([[User talk:Grum|talk]]) 18:29, 13 August 2015 (EDT)
::: Strictly speaking, we should make pages for each one because it's a new continuity but, y'know...
:::Unless AVP adds more info then it's not really a priority. [[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 00:58, 14 August 2015 (GMT)
::::Maybe just add a note in the "Transformers Legends" section of the characters' fiction write-up? I think they're worth their own pages, since between AVP, the toy bios and "Fire in the Dark," this is a fairly elaborate micro-continuity. I think maybe leaving the header in the original (BW) character pages with a link to the (Armada BW) pages would be nice though. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 20:26, 13 August 2015 (EDT)
:This may be more complicated than at first glance. Character page disambiguation isn't done by continuity family (i.e. universal cluster), but by franchise of origin. If these were brand new characters in this continuity family, wouldn't (Legends) be their closest franchise of origin? Not to mention the Armada franchise already has [[Rhinox (Armada)|Rhinox]] and [[Cheetor (Armada)|Cheetor]] as modern era Autobots. Would FitD versions of those two go on their existing (Armada) franchise character pages?
:I say this is a unique situation that requires a unique, rule-bending response: leave them on the existing [[Rhinox (BW)]], [[Cheetor (BW)]] pages. Add a Note saying "This version of the Beast Wars occurred in an Aurex cluster instead of the typical Primax cluster." --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 20:58, 13 August 2015 (EDT)
::Agreed.  Rather than create 18 dead-end three sentence pages, let's add a special disclaimer to the FITD page and to the sections of each BW / AR characters' pages.  Other approaches are much too much work for no reward and losses of clarity. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 21:35, 13 August 2015 (EDT)
:::An amazing outpouring of common sense! (Don't get used to it, Jim, you'll only disappoint yourself.) --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 22:29, 13 August 2015 (EDT)
Then how should we do the pages for the mentioned Mini-Cons who have previously appeared in Primax fiction? List the "Fire in the Dark" appearances on the same page? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 23:03, 13 August 2015 (EDT)
:I think we should keep it on their main (Armada) pages, yeah. The whole "Primax influence Aurex universe" seems more-or-less code for "It's an Aurex Universe with some Primax Universe bits shoved into it." The Primax bits, obviously being the Beast Wars characters. A lot of these questions recently seem to be hinting that sometimes, the differences between some universe is a bit of a blurred line. And the Iocus universe are where there are too many blurred lines to figure anything out so they're shoved into their own "miscellaneous" category or something. That's what I'm getting out of it, anyway. Really, we shouldn't forget that in-universe, the classification system isn't some absolute truth handed down from Primus himself. It's a classification system made up by a bunch of guys. Highly advanced guys, but still. And they seem to occasionally have trouble finding a perfect slot for some stuff, just like we do. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 02:03, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
::Looks like we were the TransTechs all along. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 08:55, 14 August 2015 (EDT)


== Who's that <s>Pokemon</s> character? ==
If anyone has any objections or comments, leave them below. Otherwise I'll just implement it tomorrow. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 19:28, 6 March 2026 (EST)
<s>I'm going through posting pics up for [[Cybertron's Most Wanted]], but need you guys' help to identify some of these guys! '''[[:File:UnknownTransTechandRattrapTranstech-CMW.jpg|This is the first character]]''' I can't identify. (He is listed as the question mark in the number 7 slot of the featured characters section.) He's not [[Starscream (TransTech)]] as I initially thought. Starscream appears later in the issue, and is definitely visually distinct.</s> '''[[:File:UnknownoffworlderandWindblade-CMW.jpg|This is the second character]]''' I can't identify. (The green one, not Windblade, listed as the question mark at #23 in the featured characters section). Although there is a slight possibility that he's supposed to be a generic, I highly doubt it since every single other character on the page is a specific guy or gal. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 15:26, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
:I don't think this is necessary, but this can be phrased in-universe if we really need it. (<nowiki>"In the [[Zamojin (species)|Zamojin]]-created [[Legends World]], its [[Character (Legends)|Character]]'s existence formed based on Character."</nowiki> or something around that.) [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 19:55, 6 March 2026 (EST)
:Maybe the first guy is just Starscream misdrawn? This post and picture from the Rook blog indicates so. [https://www.facebook.com/AxiomNewsRook/photos/pb.890548954322059.-2207520000.1439583294./906676859375935/?type=1&theater ] [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 16:17, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
::Yeah, I like that much better. If nothing else it draws way less attention to itself. --[[User:Broadside|Broadside]] ([[User talk:Broadside|talk]]) 21:55, 6 March 2026 (EST)
::Ah, well, if that post says so. That's also a much nicer version of the image I just uploaded... [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:37, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
:::Seconding Saix that this feels unnecessary, seconding Broadside that Saix's version is more straightforward if we must. --[[User:AzimuthAcolyte|AzimuthAcolyte]] ([[User talk:AzimuthAcolyte|talk]]) 22:12, 6 March 2026 (EST)
:::By the way, what about that dog-looking thing on the streets on page 1? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 16:45, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
::::My thinking is that treating them as completely separate from the regular versions is not really accurate/a bit "inside baseball. Like I said at the start, they aren't quite the same as different counterparts from another universe, sure, but they are still very specifically comedic versions of the Beast Wars characters, down to the fact that they briefly turn into them late in the series. It's why I find the Galvatron II comparison more compelling for accessibility reasons (frankly, the main Galvatron article could also use a note explaining why he's separate too). As for the wording, again I think the in-universe thing is a bit inside baseball, and not clear immediately to users who have no idea what Legends is. If people have suggestions for a better way of wording a precise explanation, I'm all for it, but I still think the intent of my suggestion is more accessible to readers. I'm also still very open to suiting the articles, but I've always struggled with the way templates work, so if anyone else is up for the task, I'm all for it. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 22:27, 6 March 2026 (EST)
::::That's just a [[turbofox]], I believe. Not an actual "character" per se. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:53, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
:::::If I'm being honest, I would prefer suites too, for all the reasons that have been given, and because the Legends World natives are stated by Leo Prime to be the "bunshin" (分身) of the normal BW characters, denoting an inherent connection between them: 君達レジェンズ世界のビースト市民は我らG1世界のビースト戦士の分身だ. 今こそ! その内なる野獣を全て呼び覚ますんだ. But if others feel that strongly enough against suites to overrule that preference, I can accept the little note proposal instead. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 00:01, 7 March 2026 (EST)
::::Actually, Jesse's said on the Allspark that it's meant to be the wolf Mini-Con from Classics. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 18:22, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
:For what it's worth, I'd planned to give Legends World headings to characters who exist fictionally in that world, [https://tfwiki.net/mediawiki/index.php?title=Rattrap_%28BW%29&diff=1899083&oldid=1898497 like so,] to cover their "fictional" appearances. [[User:TheLastGherkin|TheLastGherkin]] ([[User talk:TheLastGherkin|talk]]) 05:58, 7 March 2026 (EST)
:::::Shows what I know. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 18:27, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
::That was what I figured we would have as well in those cases; I know there's plenty of them who do show up fictionally or as toys just based on my memories. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 08:11, 7 March 2026 (EST)
::::: '''[[:File:Anotheruniodentifiedoffworlder-CMW.jpg|Here's another guy]]''' I can't identify. He's mostly obscured by text boxes, which makes it even harder. However, he's in the same panel as the other unidentified green guy, as well as the two [[Windblade (G1)|Windblades]]. He may or may not be a double to the other green offworlder, considering who else is in the panel. In any case, we're looking at the back of an orange head, big green shoulder kibble, with some yellow details on the arm from the looks of it. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 17:10, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
:While attempting to get into the endgame metaphysical hooey connecting the Legends World natives to the Transformers of JG1 on every individual character article still feels like it would do more harm than good intelligibility-wise to me, I will say that after sitting with it a while I would not be opposed to making some kind of centralized "Legends World native" article laying it all out in detail and then linking out to it everywhere. --[[User:AzimuthAcolyte|AzimuthAcolyte]] ([[User talk:AzimuthAcolyte|talk]]) 16:13, 7 March 2026 (EST)
::::: '''[[:File:Offworlderprisoners-CMW.jpg|Here's another bunch]]'''. I Think the red guy's Ironhide? But the vents on the side of his head are throwing me off. The two bug guys at the bottom, I have no idea. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 22:39, 15 August 2015 (EDT)
::I should clarify, my thinking is that there are bound to be users who will see images from the comics, recognize instinctively that they are comedy versions of the Beast Wars characters, and go to those pages and be confused why they aren't there. Yes, they could go to the disambiguation page, but I've always felt that we should optimize things for the least amount of clicking. What separates this from a Cloud type situation to me is that there are enough vagaries there that I understand the argument to split them out (the lore of that depiction of Cybertron, things like Grimlock's backstory); the Legends characters and a lot of the jokes around them exist solely in the context of either the JP Beast Wars and Beast Machines dubs (Silverbolt's depiction, Airazor and Nightscream's whole...thing, Depth Charge's fish gun thing being a character that can talk), or the BWII cartoon characters (Bighorn's infatuation with Scylla, Big Convoy being a teacher at a school as a comedic version of him as a military instructor). In-fiction, sure, they are kind of clones, but it's not the same thing as say, the Optimus Prime clone from the cartoon, because of the metaphysical stuff involved. I think that potentially presenting them as having no connection would not be fully honest. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 16:28, 7 March 2026 (EST)
::::: <s>'''[[:File:Unknownprisoninmate-CMW.jpg|And another]]'''. I'm assuming some of these guys are homages to non-Transformers franchises.</s>  [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 23:42, 15 August 2015 (EDT)
:::I don’t think we need a dedicated “Legends World native” page, the existing [[Legends World]] article already sums it up pretty nicely. We could direct people there. [[User:Cylasbreakdown|Cylasbreakdown]] ([[User talk:Cylasbreakdown|talk]]) 18:02, 7 March 2026 (EST)
::::::Hmm. The guy on the bottom left of the one with Hellbat looks like a Kamen Rider that Matt drew in Spotlight: Trailcutter. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 19:12, 16 August 2015 (EDT)
::::Although, if such a page for the Legends World inhabitants were to be made, the in-story name used for those people is "Legends World citizen" (レジェンズ世界の市民 ''Rejenzu sekai no shimin'') with those based on beast-moded characters (as in, those who possess [[Beast Power]]) referred to as either "Animal-type citizens" (動物型の市民 ''Dōbutsu-gata no shimin'') or "Beast citizens" (ビースト市民 ''Bīsuto shimin''). --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 14:47, 8 March 2026 (EDT)
:::::::Oh, yeah! The colour scheme between this one and "[[V3]]" are pretty different though. Is it patterned after another character of that franchise? That way I can give it a "nickname".[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 20:12, 16 August 2015 (EDT)
::::::::Don't know much about it, sadly. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 23:05, 16 August 2015 (EDT)
::::::That "unknown inmate" is totally based on Kamen Rider Amazon. -[[User:Ookalf|Ookalf]] ([[User talk:Ookalf|talk]]) 19:34, 16 August 2015 (EDT)
===AllSpark Almanac===
<s>So I noticed '''[[:File:Unknownrobocritter-AAII.jpg|this guy]]''' in the second AllSpark Almanac. I was not gonna bother with it, but then decided of anyone might recognize it as an actual character, and not just some generic critter. Mainly because, this is the AllSpark Almanac, and it has homages and Easter Eggs out the wazoo. If no one can think of anything though, I'll just assume it's a generic that's not noteworthy. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:43, 18 August 2015 (EDT)</s>
:Catillia, according to Forster's deviantart. Also a snake on that page is named something like 1412 or something like that. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 16:54, 18 August 2015 (EDT)
::Thanks, I looked it up, and he says he "stuck in" his real life snake (named 1812). I don't particularly feel that's worth including. If anyone feels otherwise, I can be persuaded to upload the picture and make the page, however. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 17:21, 18 August 2015 (EDT)


==Apocrypha and Vector Prime==
== Out of date MediaWiki ==
There have been a few parallel discussions about apocryphal works. [[Alignment]], [[Doomsday Redux!]], [[Bumblebee at Tyger Pax]]. User Grum went ahead and removed the Apocrypha template from Bumblebee at Tyger Pax, prompting a short discussion. I put forth the question on Doomsday Redux!, and by extension on the other unreleased Energon comics that scripts are available for, and got little response. Alignment had quite a robust debate when the AllSpark Almanac came out, but not much since then. All three have been declared to have happened by Vector Prime, and in their primary universes as opposed to in some splinter timeline. Is there value to keeping the Apocrypha template, versus just having a note detailing the unusual circumstance of the publication? It seems like something that should get a greater discussion than it's getting. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 00:05, 18 August 2015 (EDT)
:They're. Still. Fucking. Apocrypha. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 03:36, 18 August 2015 (EDT)
::Since Doomsday Redux was approved by Hasbro and declared to be canon even though it was unreleased, I think that one maybe merits a little more discussion. The others, not so much; even if they're canon from an in-universe perspective, they still aren't Hasbro-approved. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 05:07, 18 August 2015 (EDT)
:::A story that was officially commissioned and scheduled, then yanked because of licensee bankruptcy, should be listed as no different than a canceled toy.  An explanatory note afterwards can be enough.  But something that was never licensed cannot be licensed after-the-fact just through assertions and "oh, come on!"-ism.  --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 08:04, 18 August 2015 (EDT)
::::I tend to agree. I'd suggest that Vector Prime's statements be added to the notes section, and perhaps the stories be slotted into the appropriate position in the navigation track. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 09:23, 18 August 2015 (EDT)


== Galvatron II style linking ==
So, uh, [[Special:Version|this place is on MediaWiki 1.19.20]]. The 1.19.* branch went EOL back in '''''2015''''', and isn't even the last 1.19.* (which was 1.19.24). That dpesn't seem safe for y'all.


So I've noticed that there's been some disagreements on how to organize articles such as, say, Spychanger Prime or Balancing Act Prime. Perhaps we could implant a Galvatron II style system; link both in the main article, along with a suite. Also it could be used for the Thirteen and their Uniend selves, for the time being, I suppose. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 19:37, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
(For context, the current LTS is 1.39.17, which is the oldest supported branch. The most current version is 1.45.1.) {{unsigned|Hello Goodbye|2026-03-14T08:31}}
:What if we did something like this for [[Screech (Generations)|Screech]] since he is 1 version of G1 Skids? Or [[Razorclaw (Universe)|Razorclaw]] since he's 1 version of Tigerhawk? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 19:51, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
::Quite honestly, I don't think I would have a problem with that. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 19:54, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
:::Seems promising. Maybe sandbox one? --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 21:39, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
::::Unfortunately, I couldn't make a sandbox to save a life. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 21:49, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
:::::There are a couple of other characters that might also benefit from this - BW Megatron and Noble, Overlord and Gigatron maybe... I think it's probably worth looking into. --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] ([[User talk:Emvee|talk]]) 14:17, 1 October 2015 (EDT)


==Notes and images==
== irc needed ==
I seem to remember that there was some clever way of adding notes so that they don't break onto a new line when up against a left-aligned image, but for the life of me I can't find it by searching. Can anyone hit me up with the codez? --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] ([[User talk:Emvee|talk]]) 05:27, 17 September 2015 (EDT)


== Timelines fiction release order links ==
need an irc channel populated by at least 1 wiki admin. when i tried to register, the dnsbl identified me as open proxy and prevented registration. where i am from, dynamic ips and nat/network address translation is used alot so legitimate ips are mistakenly identified as such. there was no way to contact any admin about this until i lucked out. i suggest an irc channel on rizon because rizon provides cloak for all by default -- [[User:Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot|Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot]] ([[User talk:Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot|talk]]) 10:16, 7 April 2026 (EDT)
:We have no intention of implementing an IRC channel due to the required amount of time needed to maintain and monitor it outweighing its uses. There are no shortage of other ways to get in contact with wiki personnel, such as through social media or our public Discord server. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 16:19, 15 April 2026 (EDT)
::social media and discord currently unavailable for me. irc can be a side method without needing much monitor and maintaining if one is willing to use it as that. only need 1 admin on it. if a channel not possible, have you or any other admin register on rizon irc using /msg nickserv register command and i will be able to send memo which they can later read using /msg memoserv read command and respond to using /msg memoserv send command -- [[User:Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot|Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot]] ([[User talk:Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot|talk]]) 10:52, 16 April 2026 (EDT)
:::That still requires resources and time that we might not have to maintain and monitor an IRC channel just for a possible small number of users, which is not beneficial in the long run. When you say "social media and discord currently unavailable" for you, do you mean that your ISP is blocking certain sites? (We also have a Bluesky account.) --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] ([[User talk:Lonegamer78|talk]]) 08:18, 17 April 2026 (EDT)
::::connecting to rizon irc, registering and sending memos do not require any channel. why cannot any admins do this? i send memo to registered admin on irc, they can see it next time they login to irc -- [[User:Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot|Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot]] ([[User talk:Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot|talk]]) 04:47, 18 April 2026 (EDT)
:::::I'm sorry, but who uses IRC in 2026? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 06:04, 18 April 2026 (EDT)
::::::I mean I'm sure some small niche communities use it, but that's neither here nor there. The primary issue is that this wiki is a voluntary, in-your-own-time deal, even for the admins. Nobody's getting paid to do this, we all have other things going on in our lives. The Discord is itself something only some of us keep tabs on, and not even every portion of it. You're asking people who are already pretty stretched to keep track of something else just for you. I'm sorry, but that's not feasible. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 16:21, 18 April 2026 (EDT)
:check what i said about memoserv. memoserv does not require much tracking, only logging in. can there not be 1 admin registered on rizon server? -- [[User:Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot|Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot]] ([[User talk:Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot|talk]]) 10:43, 19 April 2026 (EDT)
::You have already been told no and given reasons why by three different administrators. The decision is not going to change. Please drop the subject. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 12:14, 19 April 2026 (EDT)
:how about this? no channels. 1 login to rizon server every 120 hours or higher intervals to see if i have sent any memos. possible? -- [[User:Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot|Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot]] ([[User talk:Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot|talk]]) 10:42, 20 April 2026 (EDT)
::I legitimately do not understand why you expect admins to bend over your request on building an infrastructure that you're tacitly admitting only you would use, lmao ([[User:FortressMaxxing|FortressMaxxing]] ([[User talk:FortressMaxxing|talk]]) 10:59, 20 April 2026 (EDT))
::No. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 12:10, 20 April 2026 (EDT)


I have noticed that where it is so, a ''Timelines'' story's primary previous or next story arrow points to the BotCon comic if it has the closest release date. However, the primary previous and next story arrows on BotCon comics' pages always point to other BotCon comics because they actually have a "Volume" order to go with. It seems inappropriate to me a story point to another which is not also linked to it. So what do we do, for instance, with "[[Burning Bridges]]", the first non-Facebook ''Timelines'' story to come out after BotCon 2015's "[[Cybertron's Most Wanted]]" and "[[The Return of Blurr]]"? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 00:39, 18 September 2015 (EDT)
== When does controversy surrounding a figure prove worthy enough to mention? ==
:I think the idea of putting all of the disparate Timlines stories in chronological order for the template is stupid. What exactly is gained there? [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 12:43, 18 September 2015 (EDT)
::It was probably workable at some point, but it's long since lost any functionality, I think. We keep winding up with stories that have like three or four "previous" or "next" links. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 15:19, 18 September 2015 (EDT)
:::Right. It's excess that only exists to do stuff like link "[[Collections]]" to "[[Head Games]]" because... why? How does that really help readers? It really should just be limited to the specific media (script readings, etc.) and continuity (Wings Universe, etc.), not a grab-bag of random stories that just happen to be under the Timelines banner. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 15:29, 18 September 2015 (EDT)
::::Would anyone object if I went and removed all previous and next release order story links, leaving in only previous and next continuity story links? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 14:38, 1 October 2015 (EDT)


== Harmonic resonance ==
Thinking about the whole Nexus and ss86 astro situation rn, it kinda feels like theyre the [[Elephant|elephants]] in the room that we probably have to acknowledge. However, they're not documented. Makes me wonder: any criteroa I should follow seeing these types of situations before its eligible to memtion here?[[User:Poliwag06|Poliwag06]] ([[User talk:Poliwag06|talk]]) 22:37, 27 April 2026 (EDT)
:I think you need to stop giving overinflated importance to opinions you see online. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 22:42, 27 April 2026 (EDT)
: Nobody cares, Moby. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 23:35, 27 April 2026 (EDT)
:: ...I guess I'll take that as "never allowed" then.[[User:Poliwag06|Poliwag06]] ([[User talk:Poliwag06|talk]]) 23:40, 27 April 2026 (EDT)
:What controversy is this supposed to be? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 00:32, 28 April 2026 (EDT)
::The complaints about Nexus not being a combiner and the many, many criticisms of SS86 Astrotrain about inaccuracies/proportions etc. (Ok maybe the latter can somewhat be ignored because its just people critiquing his flaws once they got him in hand+stock images+they dont like how he looks compared to Siege).[[User:Poliwag06|Poliwag06]] ([[User talk:Poliwag06|talk]]) 00:52, 28 April 2026 (EDT)
::: People were whining about Nexus info from leaks before the post on Mark Maher's personal Instagram account and actual announcements by Hasbro confirming that yes, Nexus is a combiner frame compatible figure that can fit into the AOTP Superion, and yes, Nexus is going to be a full combiner later in 2027, we just don't know what that'll look like and I hope it's a full commander class combiner frame and four deluxe limbs (neither are confirmed as of this minute). The discourse over him not being a combiner is from stolen and unreliable info, so why add more fuel to a flame that people started themselves less than a week before the actual reveal of the Voyager figure? -[ [[User:Singularity|Singularity]] ([[User talk:Singularity|talk]]) 02:11, 28 April 2026 (EDT) ]
:Is this just about the fact that SS86 Astrotrain looks like ass? If so... I'll be the dissenting voice here and say that yes, there should be space to maybe mention the general reception of a given figure into a toy section, ''as long'' as it reflects the broader evaluation of the community and doesn't just become an editor's sole personal gripes with a given toy. With SS86 Astrotrain, I do think the consensus is pretty settled at least (though I have no idea about what's up with Nexus Prime). ([[User:FortressMaxxing|FortressMaxxing]] ([[User talk:FortressMaxxing|talk]]) 01:00, 28 April 2026 (EDT))
::Nexus complaints are mostly hes not a gestalt (source: prematurely released images) and his alt mode being a flying brick, though it has settled down a bit when people got their hands on him. I think the former may or may not be connected to why they had to post that pic that he had a torso mode (which is apparently not shown on the box or called out, much like Sideways' head swapping).[[User:Poliwag06|Poliwag06]] ([[User talk:Poliwag06|talk]]) 01:05, 28 April 2026 (EDT)
:::You yourself said "source: prematurely released images" so why are you complaining over stolen pictures that had little to no context to them since they were leaks? Most if not all of the complaints about the figure being "not a gestalt" were dissuaded with the info given to us from the official reveal video (linked in the references of AOTP Nexus' article) and Mark Maher's post of Nexus wearing Superion (also linked in the references of AOTP Nexus' article). Also, "his alt mode being a flying brick" is a matter of taste. Nexus fits perfectly with my Diaclone Jumpstarter redecos as Topspin and Twin Twist are now combiners thanks to Titans Return. - [[User:Singularity|Singularity]] ([[User talk:Singularity|talk]]) 02:11, 28 April 2026 (EDT) ]
::::The Nexus Prime thing really feels like a matter of OP just not liking this one toy tbh, I really haven't seen a lot of people complaining about it ([[User:FortressMaxxing|FortressMaxxing]] ([[User talk:FortressMaxxing|talk]]) 02:20, 28 April 2026 (EDT))
:::::No, Im fine with Nexus. But yeah, whatever I saw was from illegitimate material floating around, and I probably just...didnt notice people had gotten over it (TvTropes and Emgo mentioning it probably further made me think so despute said sources being as reliable as [[Sideways (Armada)|Sideways]]. Now I feel like I raised this topic that I had no idea how to phrase and now have to live with it...[[User:Poliwag06|Poliwag06]] ([[User talk:Poliwag06|talk]]) 02:28, 28 April 2026 (EDT)
:We are absolutely not mentioning every time some people somewhere bitch about a new toy that's months away. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 01:18, 28 April 2026 (EDT)
::Undeestood.(Sorry I brought it up)[[User:Poliwag06|Poliwag06]] ([[User talk:Poliwag06|talk]]) 01:22, 28 April 2026 (EDT)
:Unless something is a big enough deal that it leads to toys being recalled, it's probably not worth mentioning on the wiki. (Also, that Nexus "controversy" is based on leaks, and you've been here long enough that you should know our stance on leaks.) -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 01:26, 28 April 2026 (EDT)


So throughout [[Ask Vector Prime]], the theme of "trans-dimensional harmonic resonance"/"quantum harmonic resonance" has come up as an in-universe explanation for most commonly used characters (i.e. the franchise tropes of Optimus Prime, Megatron, Grimlock, etc.), design re-use across continuity families (i.e. pre-Transformer toys which got recycled as Transformers toys), mistaken use of story elements which seemingly don't belong (i.e. ''Armada'' Beast Wars in "[[Fire in the Dark]]"), other things (i.e. RiD Unicron as a seemingly mundane Transformer who (not) coincidentally became a universe-destroying planet), etc. Do we want to make a page(s) about this and how should we handle it? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 21:23, 9 October 2015 (EDT)
== Toy entry idea: links to Hasbro Pulse and TakaraTomy Mall entries for modern new releases ==
:Same way anything else is handled? Create an article and document the things VP said about it? --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 21:25, 9 October 2015 (EDT)


== Online Transformers Games help request ==
We have long linked to tfu.info pages at the bottom of toy entries, such as on "[[Shockwave (G1)/toys]]". How about we link to Hasbro Pulse and TakaraTomy Mall listings for modern toys when said listings go up? It may incite more contributors to remember to save snapshots of those relevant webpages on the Internet Archive when the official listings eventually get removed in due course. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 02:56, 7 May 2026 (EDT)
So, I've recently been frustrated with the fact that many online games have been taken down, making it really hard to create articles for them. I've been doing well creating articles for them up to now, either finding copies of the games on other websites or cobbling together articles by watching play-throughs on Youtube. However, I've hit upon my first real snag with  "[[Transformers Prime: Beast Hunters Game]]." I can't find any footage of it whatsoever anywhere, and the game doesn't seem to load on the Hasbro or Hub website. I never played the game, so I can't create anything from memory either. Anyone has anything to help me out with this? --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 22:29, 17 October 2015 (EDT)
: I can get behind this, I'm usually first to add those individual websites from Takara Tomy when available, if that's a new mandate I can help. [[User:MahXyme|MahXyme/MahXymal]] ([[User talk:MahXyme|talk]]) 16:56, 9 May 2026 (EDT)


== Repurposing vs Multi-family toys ==
Over on the discussion about [[Talk:Clampdown (RID)|Clampdown]], M Sipher raised an excellent point about how silly it is to not have the Clampdown [[Kreon]] on the Clampdown [[Transformers: Robots in Disguise (2015 franchise)|Robots in Disguise]] page. This dovetailed nicely with my own musings on the subject. Right now, technically, the way the wiki is organized if we wanted to have that toy on two pages we'd have to arbitrarily declare one Clampdown to be a [[repurposing]] of the other, which I find to be ridiculous. I had a discussion on one of the talk pages about removing the repurposing label from toys that were simply imported from one continuity family to another, only to be shot down.


As a compromise position, I've worked up a related idea: "multi-family toys". That is to say, a toy that seems to exist more-or-less unchanged across multiple families. This seems like a distinct idea from a straight-up repurpose. To me, at least, there seems to be a fundamental difference from someone like [[Dirge (Armada)|Armada Dirge]], which is a brand-new character based on a toy with a different name and bio, to someone like [[Lockdown (G1)|IDW's Lockdown]]. Furthermore, [[Ask Vector Prime]] has formalized the idea that Hasbro's been running with, namely that a character can comfortably exist across multiple [[continuity family|continuity families]] and that this is no big deal.
== "Canceled media" template==
With the recent creation of the "Canceled video games" category, I can't help but wonder: in the same way that we have a little template for canceled toys, shouldn't we also have one to add to the top of the page of media that was canceled and never saw an official release? Seems like it could come in handy! ([[User:FortressMaxxing|FortressMaxxing]] ([[User talk:FortressMaxxing|talk]]) 12:30, 12 May 2026 (EDT))
:I'm in favor.  Plenty of canned comics and an entire dumped franchise in Transtech to justify it. [[User:MCRG|MCRG]] ([[User talk:MCRG|talk]]) 13:00, 12 May 2026 (EDT)
:Agreed. Definitely something that would be pretty useful for a lot of articles! - [[User:IGEBM13|IGEBM13]] ([[User talk:IGEBM13|talk]]) 22:04, 12 May 2026 (EDT)


This is my go at introducing the idea: [[Giggidy/Sandbox/Multi-Family Toys]]. Any feedback would be appreciated. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 16:34, 25 October 2015 (EDT)
== Digging into the Beast Machines/Transtech Era ==
Just throwing a note in here that I'm getting in contact with some folks who were on the Transformers team during the Beast Machines/Transtech era, so I'll be adding notes, fleshing out some things, and adding design credits where I can. Like with the G2 ad creators, I'll post up the full emails on the relevant discussion pages as I get permission. [[User:MCRG|MCRG]] ([[User talk:MCRG|talk]]) 13:04, 12 May 2026 (EDT)
:Nice, I'm excited to see where this goes! ([[User:FortressMaxxing|FortressMaxxing]] ([[User talk:FortressMaxxing|talk]]) 15:32, 12 May 2026 (EDT))

Latest revision as of 02:04, 13 May 2026


This is the place for discussion of topics that affect the entire wiki. For less wide-reaching subjects, either use articles' individual talk pages or our Discord server.

Some topics that would ordinarily be here have merited their own pages:

Specific Discussion Subjects
Moving From Wikia:

New Ad Policy:

Bookworm Database-Crash:

Server Move:

Relicensing:

Dealing With Vandalism:

GoBots Sister Wiki:

Wiki Technical Information:


MediaWiki talk:Community Portal/Archive


Binder of Revelation Illustration Credits

[edit]

Okay, don't kill me here, I'm just hoping that the artists who contributed to the Binder fifteen-ish years ago get their proper due since it's out in the open now. I got in touch with the art director of the Binder of Revelation and have a fairly complete list of credits for who did what illustration. Since this isn't actually a published work, how do we go about giving proper illustration credits? Do we even credit anyone? Considering the document itself has no credits, I feel like it's worthwhile that the artists get recognized, even if we aren't putting any images up ourselves. MCRG (talk) 21:37, 25 November 2025 (EST)

I don't think this is objectionable info to note at the least. Saix (talk) 23:03, 25 November 2025 (EST)
For now, maybe put your raw info on a sandbox so we can get a better sense of it? Most of the Binder art I know of was by Ken Christiansen, for instance, so if all but a few pieces are by him, it would seem silly to list them all individually. But I'm guessing it's more varied than that. —wadapan (talk) 00:26, 26 November 2025 (EST)
It's a pretty wide spread, surprisingly. A lot of the pieces are tag team works where Eric Siebenaler did roughs and other artists did the finals, but it's around 5-10 artists without me checking the exact notes at the moment. I'll start getting that together.MCRG (talk) 14:41, 26 November 2025 (EST)
All known credits added. On a side note, is it worth pointing out somewhere that the Binder itself is written in the style of a RPG manual instead of an actual franchise bible? It goes a long way in explaining why it was so quickly disregarded by other creative teams when comparing it to bibles from other franchises or just other series bibles within Transformers on the whole, and the pricetag attached to the project.--MCRG (talk) 15:23, 21 January 2026 (EST)

What are we calling the new "Core" Transformers stuff?

[edit]

So... what should we call the new generically branded "Transformers" toys that have been showing up? (Prime Changers, Smash Changers, Tiny Turbo Changers, maybe more in the future). Should it be a separate new thing or maybe part of Authentics? The Prime Changer Optimus, Bumbleebee, and Megatron were previously added under Authentics, while someone just started using "Transformers (2026)" for the Tiny Turbo Arcee and Elita, which got me thinking that we should probably figure this out soon.
From what I've gathered they all use "TRA Core" in their listing names, but their packaging design seems identical to current Authentics packaging design, also lacking a distinct subtitle and focusing on "Evergreen" characters to start off. Then again, Hasbro homogenizing all their packaging designs in the last year makes it hard to tell if this line is meant to be its own thing. Though it is notable that unlike prior Authentics, this "Core" line is using bigger size classes and is available at bigger retailers like Target instead of dollar stores. –BluJayWarrior (talk) 18:24, 13 January 2026 (EST)

I was JUST adding a section here and rather than rewriting...
Okay just kinda checking in, because thanks to Hasbro's goddamn infuriating thing about not promoting/announcing anything other than the expensive collector crap, the load of sub-line-less not-Authentics "Core" stuff hitting Targets (at least, has anything popped up at Walmart?) is a bit of a "how do we handle this" deal. Both "how much product is there" and "do we treat this as a separate line, as an extension of Authentics despite it not being a 'discount' store line, or what". I'm leaning towards "just list it as its own line with G1 characters unless pretty explicitly otherwise". --M Sipher (talk) 18:30, 13 January 2026 (EST)
Oh right, Walmart. Off memory they do have the Authentics-styled Mega Sting Bumbleebee (could also be considered a "larger price point" I guess). No clue if any listings gave it a separate name like "Core" has. Walmart also has a bunch of merch stuff in Authentics-style packaging like big head helicopters, Dancing Transformers and a giant RC Bumblebee. –BluJayWarrior (talk) 18:57, 13 January 2026 (EST)

Size of the page again

[edit]

This page is getting pretty long again, so could someone archive the last year? Hilfam (talk) 12:03, 22 January 2026 (EST)

Idea for a page?

[edit]

Perhaps a page discussing the various Transformers that have "base modes" as a third form, like Powermaster Prime, Motormaster, etc. It's a major recurring gimmick since G1. DrakeyC (talk) 09:09, 30 January 2026 (EST)

I think a general "base mode" article would make sense, yeah. Saix (talk) 10:19, 30 January 2026 (EST)
seconded. frankly shocked to learn there isn't one already --Arren Meuchel (talk) 11:58, 30 January 2026 (EST)
I think base modes lend themselves better to a category page rather than a full-blown article. What would it even say? “Some Transformers have Base Modes. Here’s a list of all the toys, here’s a list of all the episodes/issues where a base mode appeared.” Cylasbreakdown (talk) 16:51, 4 February 2026 (EST)
I don't see why not. We have articles specifically for Beast mode, Super Mode, attack mode, and transportation mode. For such a prominent feature of Transformers since its early days I'm surprised there doesn't seem to be a specific write-up about city/base modes anywhere, and not even as single mention on the main alternate mode page. Closest I can find is Titan (group)#Alternate modes. —BluJayWarrior (talk) 18:01, 4 February 2026 (EST)
I attempted a sandbox for a Base Mode page long ago, but I stopped since I realized it would require an extensive amount of work to list all fiction usages & differentiate what counts/what does not count not (something I struggled with the Micromasters Transports assorments -MahXyme/MahXymal (talk) 17:53, 5 February 2026 (EST)
Seems like a good start at least. I'd argue for listing "groups" of base modes (Micromaster Stations, Titans Return Leaders, etc.) rather than individual figures --Arren Meuchel (talk) 20:36, 5 February 2026 (EST)

Agreed on the organizational aspects. And, that sandbox is a good start, though yeah, it'd need a lot of work to go through all the toylines and make a comprehensive list. There's also the fact that certain toys with base modes are intended to link to others, some universal and some just one specific bot, so it may be tricky to document when that play feature is prevelant. DrakeyC (talk) 10:35, 18 February 2026 (EST)

About character name translations

[edit]

Um... I'm new here. I have a question, and I'm not sure if this question falls under Help:Official info...

That is, I want to add the translated names of some characters. But I want to know what basis this wiki uses to choose foreign translations. Must the foreign translations be ones used by Hasbro and/or TakaraTomy and their licensees in order to remain on this wiki? Can some of the names translated by fan Chinese translation groups be considered valid? Especially in cases where they were the first to provide a translation for a work (possibly the only one) and fixed certain character names.

There are also some characters (such as Sentinel Maximus) whose works may never be introduced by licensors in certain languages, but they do have a commonly used translated name. Should we include this translated name, or just keep it without a translation in that language?

For example, when IDW comic books were introduced in China, the translation team at the time translated Tarn (G1) as 璇玑湖. So this would count as an authorized translation. However, because this translated name has nothing to do with the original meaning (as well as some other controversies surrounding that Chinese translation group), the more common and widely used Chinese translation for Tarn (G1) is the direct transliteration 塔恩. 璇玑湖 has basically been abandoned. In this case, which translation should we choose?

I suddenly realized that 塔恩 could be used. The packaging of Blokees does indeed call him 塔恩.

Also, does the foreign name used in the product titles by the Hasbro official flagship store count?

Uh, this question might seem a bit silly, or it might come across as a bit strange because I'm speaking English through a translator. But if the existing Wiki rules already cover this issue, please just tell me, thank you.Micheva (talk) 10:18, 12 February 2026 (EST)

This is a fantastic question. I have no authority here so don’t take this as word of law, but I believe that Romanizations on this wiki (which I think is somewhat similar) are case-by-case. The first romanization of Deathsaurus was “Deszarus”, but the page is still titled “Deathsaurus” because that’s what the name actually is supposed to be. (Deathsaurus’ name issues are actually pretty interesting, at least to me, and I’d recommend reading the wiki article’s section on it.) Conversely, Jallguar IS the first romanization used, and the article title, but in that instance I suppose that there isn’t really any convincing reason to use any of the other romanizations we’ve gotten over the years since none of them actually mean anything (it’s just the Japanese word for Jaguar with an extra syllable inserted). I’m rambling. What I would do for foreign names is, stick with the first official translation used, unless you think there’s a compelling reason to use a different one (like what you said with Tarn), and in that case bring it up on the discussion page for the article in question or in the Discord server. Cylasbreakdown (talk) 02:43, 15 February 2026 (EST)
They need to be translations used in official material. That's just the easiest line in the sand we can make. If different translations are used officially, we note them all, barring obvious typos and the such. Saix (talk) 05:22, 15 February 2026 (EST)
Does the name used for the flagship store count? Those works that were not introduced have kept them without translations, right?Micheva (talk) 06:52, 15 February 2026 (EST)

Some publications that contain many translations (such as the Chinese version of DW's MTMTE) I actually don't have the resources for, which is a pity. I have come to realize some issues. For instance, if the translation team used a certain translation term when translating a publication, but later discovered that this term was incorrect, they made the correction in their subsequent fan-based translations. However, since the publication was not re-released after its introduction, the translation term in the authorized merchandise could not be modified. Can we adopt the revised translation term provided by this translation team?

There is another less rigorous question: Does THE translation given by the authorized Chinese translation and introduction team of Chris McFeely's TRANSFORMERS: THE BASICS count?Micheva (talk) 07:07, 15 February 2026 (EST)

THE BASICS, while incredibly informative, is not official, so no, it would not count. Cylasbreakdown (talk) 15:52, 16 February 2026 (EST)
I reiterate, official material only. Mistakes are unfortunate, but that's how it goes and we can't presume unofficial translations will make it into official material. Saix (talk) 17:42, 16 February 2026 (EST)

OK, I will do it this way. Strictly follow the official materials.

And one more question: Can the translation names used by Hasbro's official store be used in this Wiki?Micheva (talk) 23:40, 16 February 2026 (EST)

Material from Hasbro is fine. Saix (talk) 01:50, 17 February 2026 (EST)

So when are we splitting the Legends World characters off?

[edit]

It made sense to keep them together when Legends first started as Jungle Animals in Decidedly Non-Jungle Situations, and this wasn't worth pursuing before now since it'd be just moving the furniture around. But the lore got deeper and now with New Legends as ongoing fiction I think it's worth looking at again. As much as Legends World is treated as its own dimension, it is fundamentally just a location easily accessible from the JG1 timeline populated with clones* of Transformers from the wider continuity that exists around it. And when we write pages for duplicate characters who co-exist, do we not typically split them off? If that's the yardstick, several Legends Worlders interact with or refer to their JG1 selves, including Rattrap, Rhinox, Waspinator, Arcee, and T-AI. Leo Prime even moves in with Lio Convoy, and keeping those same dudes on the same page is complicating the already complex timeline presented by "Age of Primes". — TheLastGherkin (talk) 12:44, 3 March 2026 (EST) *"clones" is a simpler term for these guys than "magically created lifeforms in a telepathic dream world based on real people from 300 years in the future" but same diff

It's always been strange to me that they weren't split off already. Having them on the same page is extremely confusing. I'd say go for it. --Arren Meuchel (talk) 12:57, 3 March 2026 (EST)
Personally I think this might be overthinking things. I'd agree that it's not quite 1 to 1 with other cross dimension stuff, but functionally Legends Rattrap is a version of the Beast Wars character even if he is in this weird pocket dimension type thing, and ever single "native" to the dimension we see is basically just a comedic version of a pre-existing character. And we've always kept cross dimensional stories with versions of the same character on the same page (Universe, TransTech, et cetera). It makes things complicated, sure, but JG1 stuff has been like that for nearly two decades now. Escargon (talk) 13:00, 3 March 2026 (EST)
For my money, there's just so much with the Legends idiots now, and there's going to keep being more of it, so we'd be best off siloing them into their own pages and not having to think about them any more. Universe and TransTech stories that had the characters interacting were generally one-offs or short runs. This is a Cloud or Galvatron II situation, to me. --Broadside (talk) 13:45, 3 March 2026 (EST)
I am on the record as considering reader experience our prime directive and this would be such a drastic improvement to the readability of our coverage of the Legends rat's nest that I've been meaning to suggest it for years. Consider me emphatically in favor. --AzimuthAcolyte (talk) 20:12, 3 March 2026 (EST)
I think I'm also generally leaning towards "this is already complicated and it's just going to get more complicated so let's detangle this shit sooner rather than later." -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 20:19, 3 March 2026 (EST)
Fine with this idea. Are we using Japanese names since those characters have never shown up in material with Hasbro names? Saix (talk) 20:31, 3 March 2026 (EST)
That feels unnecessarily pedantic. --Broadside (talk) 22:16, 3 March 2026 (EST)
One could make the argument that it's too steeped in Japanese fan culture/terminology to use the Hasbro names, but I really only care about the human characters having Japanese names (because they're normal people living in Tokyo and wouldn't be named things like "T-AI"). Saix (talk) 22:25, 3 March 2026 (EST)
Also, I think Roadbuster, Whirl, and Windblade can stay as they are, since all three are meant to be the main JG1 versions of those characters anyway. Saix (talk) 22:37, 3 March 2026 (EST)
I'm theoretically in favour of Japanese names, since it would improve legibility of say, the time Rattle and Rattrap teamed up – and we're absolutely keeping Lio Convoy, since Leo Prime has gone through a textual name change – BUT: characters with toys, at least, had both the Japanese and Hasbro names on their packaging. It would be inconsistent to have Rattrap and Waspinator and Optimus Primal alongside Cheetus and — I can't think of another example, but I'm interrupting this train of thought because I CAN think of Optimus Minor being made Primal's son on the basis of Beast Convoy's western name. And how many minor guys like, I dunno, Build Boy, are named in dialogue? We could always title the article Wedge and slap a Noname-uncomfirmed on that bad boy like how we did with Shattered Glass in the distant past.
Also, what are we feeling is best for a disambig? (Legends)? (LG)? (LW)? — TheLastGherkin (talk) 04:43, 4 March 2026 (EST)
Or we could go with the Kre-O approach of "major characters get their own pages, cameos don't" I GUESS — TheLastGherkin (talk) 04:53, 4 March 2026 (EST)
Minor is only called "Minor" in Legends, so he wouldn't get the full name. I vote (Legends). Saix (talk) 05:01, 4 March 2026 (EST)
I second the "(Legends)" motion. It's the name of the franchise these character debuted in, in the name of the world they live in, and it's one word. We don't put Masterforce characters at "MF", for instance, and "Legends" isn't even a compound word that could be abbreviated. --Sabrblade (talk) 16:32, 4 March 2026 (EST)
Doing a cursory sweep we appear to have already used "(Legends)" for a bazillion mobile game events such that it might be prudent to avoid that one. My two cents would be to either use the "(LG)" abbreviation from the packaging/story titles/etc or straight up spell out "(Legends World)" for absolute maximum clarity. --AzimuthAcolyte (talk) 17:50, 4 March 2026 (EST)
I'm leaning towards LG: it's on every toy box and in the title of the vast majority of chapters. Plus, Deadlock uses it in-universe. And it's shorter! — TheLastGherkin (talk) 18:02, 4 March 2026 (EST)
"Legends" is also spoken in-universe countless times all throughout the Legends manga series, even in the most recent End of G1 Universe comic starring the green Lio Convoy. The reason "LG" is on every toy box is because it's part of each toy's ID number, which we have never let dictate any of our disambiguation tags. Otherwise, we'd be using "(BT)" instead of "(Binaltech)", "(MP)" instead of "(Masterpiece)", "(UN)" instead of "(United)", "(TG)" instead of "(Generations)", "(TAV)" instead of "(Adventure)", "(PP)" for Power of the Primes instead of "(POTP)", "(SG)" instead of "(Siege)", "(TCV)" instead of "(Cyberverse)", "(ER)" instead of "(Earthrise)", "(KD)" instead of "(Kingdom)", "(TL)" instead of "(Legacy)", etc. That Transformers Legends mobile game (which has been dead for over a decade, even) that "(Legends)" is currently being used for is a nonissue when "(Legends)" is also currently being used for things from the Transformers Legends anthology book, particularly Susan (Legends). And "(Legends)" has already been in use for things from the Legends manga, too, like Groundshaker (Legends), Synapse (Legends), Duncan (Legends), and Plasma Energy Chamber (Legends). It's no different from how we use "(RID)" for things from both the 2001 and 2025 franchises, "(Universe)" for things from both the 2003 and 2008 franchises, and "(Generations)" for things from both the pre-Combiner Wars toyline and from the series of Japanese guidebooks. --Sabrblade (talk) 00:37, 5 March 2026 (EST)
Yes, the principle was always "least disambiguation necessary for titles". A particular disambiguation is fine to be used by different things. Saix (talk) 02:13, 5 March 2026 (EST)
Speaking personally I cannot say I am terribly invested in any specific disambig so if y'all feel that strongly about "(Legends)," so be it. --AzimuthAcolyte (talk) 15:00, 5 March 2026 (EST)
Historically I've leaned more in the direction of "this feels like putting these dumb animals on too much of a pedestal", given the meta-importance that page splits tend to imply to the wiki's audience, but I find the "these are functionally clones who exist within JG1 continuity specifically, not just 'normal' alternate versions of the characters" framing pretty compelling, so I'm surprising myself by saying I wouldn't be opposed to a split at this point. Making stuff like multiple Lios Convoy interacting less insane to write about is definitely a bonus too. Jalaguy (talk) 04:34, 4 March 2026 (EST)
Oh, also, and I hope it would go without saying, but obviously the toys that technically represent Transformerised Legends World guys would need to go on both pages (which I think we're already doing anyway for cases like the Targetmasters that are actually technically Kiss Players and Beastformers and stuff). Jalaguy (talk) 04:41, 4 March 2026 (EST)

Thinking about it more, the Galvatron II example is more presuasive to me; a suite style situation would be fine. As for names, I don't really care about T-AI but for any of the Transformers I think that's a bit much. Escargon (talk) 08:08, 4 March 2026 (EST)

Having gone through Category:Legends World natives and Category:Legends World humans, if we apply the Kre-O Rule of Notability, that gives us the following:

  • Split: Airazor, Arcee, Big Convoy, Bighorn, Blackarachnia, Cheetor, Dinobot, Lio Convoy, Lio Junior, Megatron, Nightscream, Optimus Minor, Optimus Primal, Rattrap, Rhinox, Scorponok, Scuba, Scylla, Silverbolt, Stampy, Starscream, Tarantulas, Terrorsaur, Tigatron, Waspinator, Nightbeat, T-AI
  • Lump: Roadbuster, Whirl, basically every real person making a cameo
  • Small roles: Archadis, Armordillo, BB, Break, Bump, Colada, Diver, Drill Nuts, Gas Skunk, Guiledart, Heinrad, Ikard, Inferno, Longrack, Magmatron, Megastorm, Kobanzametarō, Prowl, Quickstrike, Rampage, Randy, Ravage, Saberback, Sling, Star Upper, Tasmania Kid, Transmutate, Venom, Wedge, Wolfang, Kelly, Kenneth Onishi, Koji Onishi
  • TBD: Botanica (doesn't have a write-up yet), Buzz Saw (does not appear in JG1 elsewhere), Savage and Noble, Tank Drones (do we split subgroups?)

TheLastGherkin (talk) 09:02, 4 March 2026 (EST)

The Kre-O thing is because some characters (in fiction or toys) can't be exclusively slotted into G1 or movie buckets since they shift design cues between them. I think it's easier to just be consistent with the Legends gremlin people (other than real people cameos). Sensible to keep the sentient toys (Mini-Cons, Encore Big Convoy) and the three JG1 inductees (Roadbuster, Whirl, Windblade) on their respective character pages, I think. Like Wolfang/Howlinger, Buzz Saw exists in JG1 somewhere off-camera, since they got his toy. I don't think Tank Drone needs another page; it's a mass-produced bodytype that can cover instances across universes, not a specific person. Saix (talk) 09:19, 4 March 2026 (EST)
I'm somewhere in the middle between "splitting them off the main article would help improve readability, yes," and "splitting them off entirely feels a bit too far since all of them are essentially just different versions of the main Beast Wars et al characters", so I think going the aforementioned route of suiting them would be the cleanest solution. Keeps them joined at the hip with the main versions that they're basically new versions of, while also giving them their own webpages to tidy up readability on the main pages. The Galvatron II analogy is very apropos in this case. --Sabrblade (talk) 10:01, 4 March 2026 (EST)
Coming back to this with refreshed knowledge, Botanica is split, Buzz Saw is small roles (which is now also split), Savage and Noble are split both from Noble (BM) and from each other, and Rhinox/Tankor can go on the same page. — TheLastGherkin (talk) 18:02, 4 March 2026 (EST)

So uh. I've come around on the split pages. However...I don't think completely removing any reference to them on the Beast Wars pages themselves is particularly helpful? Whether it be a suite or a "see this article for more information" I don't mind, but there should be some reference since like Sabrblade says, they are just comedic versions of the Beast Wars guys. Escargon (talk) 07:37, 6 March 2026 (EST)

Maybe do the disambiguation like this? Cylasbreakdown (talk) 14:09, 6 March 2026 (EST)
This article is about the Beast Wars Maximal. For his Legends World counterpart, see Rattrap (Legends). For a list of other meanings, see Rattrap (disambiguation).


Alright, I've decided that for now I'm just going to add a note and a link mostly because I have little patience when it comes to formatting suite links. It's going to be along these lines:

Due to the unique nature of Legends place within JG1 continuity, we've opted to separate out this version of the character into its own micro-page. See [article link] for more details.

If anyone has any objections or comments, leave them below. Otherwise I'll just implement it tomorrow. Escargon (talk) 19:28, 6 March 2026 (EST)

I don't think this is necessary, but this can be phrased in-universe if we really need it. ("In the [[Zamojin (species)|Zamojin]]-created [[Legends World]], its [[Character (Legends)|Character]]'s existence formed based on Character." or something around that.) Saix (talk) 19:55, 6 March 2026 (EST)
Yeah, I like that much better. If nothing else it draws way less attention to itself. --Broadside (talk) 21:55, 6 March 2026 (EST)
Seconding Saix that this feels unnecessary, seconding Broadside that Saix's version is more straightforward if we must. --AzimuthAcolyte (talk) 22:12, 6 March 2026 (EST)
My thinking is that treating them as completely separate from the regular versions is not really accurate/a bit "inside baseball. Like I said at the start, they aren't quite the same as different counterparts from another universe, sure, but they are still very specifically comedic versions of the Beast Wars characters, down to the fact that they briefly turn into them late in the series. It's why I find the Galvatron II comparison more compelling for accessibility reasons (frankly, the main Galvatron article could also use a note explaining why he's separate too). As for the wording, again I think the in-universe thing is a bit inside baseball, and not clear immediately to users who have no idea what Legends is. If people have suggestions for a better way of wording a precise explanation, I'm all for it, but I still think the intent of my suggestion is more accessible to readers. I'm also still very open to suiting the articles, but I've always struggled with the way templates work, so if anyone else is up for the task, I'm all for it. Escargon (talk) 22:27, 6 March 2026 (EST)
If I'm being honest, I would prefer suites too, for all the reasons that have been given, and because the Legends World natives are stated by Leo Prime to be the "bunshin" (分身) of the normal BW characters, denoting an inherent connection between them: 君達レジェンズ世界のビースト市民は我らG1世界のビースト戦士の分身だ. 今こそ! その内なる野獣を全て呼び覚ますんだ. But if others feel that strongly enough against suites to overrule that preference, I can accept the little note proposal instead. --Sabrblade (talk) 00:01, 7 March 2026 (EST)
For what it's worth, I'd planned to give Legends World headings to characters who exist fictionally in that world, like so, to cover their "fictional" appearances. — TheLastGherkin (talk) 05:58, 7 March 2026 (EST)
That was what I figured we would have as well in those cases; I know there's plenty of them who do show up fictionally or as toys just based on my memories. Escargon (talk) 08:11, 7 March 2026 (EST)
While attempting to get into the endgame metaphysical hooey connecting the Legends World natives to the Transformers of JG1 on every individual character article still feels like it would do more harm than good intelligibility-wise to me, I will say that after sitting with it a while I would not be opposed to making some kind of centralized "Legends World native" article laying it all out in detail and then linking out to it everywhere. --AzimuthAcolyte (talk) 16:13, 7 March 2026 (EST)
I should clarify, my thinking is that there are bound to be users who will see images from the comics, recognize instinctively that they are comedy versions of the Beast Wars characters, and go to those pages and be confused why they aren't there. Yes, they could go to the disambiguation page, but I've always felt that we should optimize things for the least amount of clicking. What separates this from a Cloud type situation to me is that there are enough vagaries there that I understand the argument to split them out (the lore of that depiction of Cybertron, things like Grimlock's backstory); the Legends characters and a lot of the jokes around them exist solely in the context of either the JP Beast Wars and Beast Machines dubs (Silverbolt's depiction, Airazor and Nightscream's whole...thing, Depth Charge's fish gun thing being a character that can talk), or the BWII cartoon characters (Bighorn's infatuation with Scylla, Big Convoy being a teacher at a school as a comedic version of him as a military instructor). In-fiction, sure, they are kind of clones, but it's not the same thing as say, the Optimus Prime clone from the cartoon, because of the metaphysical stuff involved. I think that potentially presenting them as having no connection would not be fully honest. Escargon (talk) 16:28, 7 March 2026 (EST)
I don’t think we need a dedicated “Legends World native” page, the existing Legends World article already sums it up pretty nicely. We could direct people there. Cylasbreakdown (talk) 18:02, 7 March 2026 (EST)
Although, if such a page for the Legends World inhabitants were to be made, the in-story name used for those people is "Legends World citizen" (レジェンズ世界の市民 Rejenzu sekai no shimin) with those based on beast-moded characters (as in, those who possess Beast Power) referred to as either "Animal-type citizens" (動物型の市民 Dōbutsu-gata no shimin) or "Beast citizens" (ビースト市民 Bīsuto shimin). --Sabrblade (talk) 14:47, 8 March 2026 (EDT)

Out of date MediaWiki

[edit]

So, uh, this place is on MediaWiki 1.19.20. The 1.19.* branch went EOL back in 2015, and isn't even the last 1.19.* (which was 1.19.24). That dpesn't seem safe for y'all.

(For context, the current LTS is 1.39.17, which is the oldest supported branch. The most current version is 1.45.1.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hello Goodbye (talkcontribs) 2026-03-14T08:31.

irc needed

[edit]

need an irc channel populated by at least 1 wiki admin. when i tried to register, the dnsbl identified me as open proxy and prevented registration. where i am from, dynamic ips and nat/network address translation is used alot so legitimate ips are mistakenly identified as such. there was no way to contact any admin about this until i lucked out. i suggest an irc channel on rizon because rizon provides cloak for all by default -- Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot (talk) 10:16, 7 April 2026 (EDT)

We have no intention of implementing an IRC channel due to the required amount of time needed to maintain and monitor it outweighing its uses. There are no shortage of other ways to get in contact with wiki personnel, such as through social media or our public Discord server. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 16:19, 15 April 2026 (EDT)
social media and discord currently unavailable for me. irc can be a side method without needing much monitor and maintaining if one is willing to use it as that. only need 1 admin on it. if a channel not possible, have you or any other admin register on rizon irc using /msg nickserv register command and i will be able to send memo which they can later read using /msg memoserv read command and respond to using /msg memoserv send command -- Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot (talk) 10:52, 16 April 2026 (EDT)
That still requires resources and time that we might not have to maintain and monitor an IRC channel just for a possible small number of users, which is not beneficial in the long run. When you say "social media and discord currently unavailable" for you, do you mean that your ISP is blocking certain sites? (We also have a Bluesky account.) --Lonegamer78 (talk) 08:18, 17 April 2026 (EDT)
connecting to rizon irc, registering and sending memos do not require any channel. why cannot any admins do this? i send memo to registered admin on irc, they can see it next time they login to irc -- Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot (talk) 04:47, 18 April 2026 (EDT)
I'm sorry, but who uses IRC in 2026? S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47 (talk) 06:04, 18 April 2026 (EDT)
I mean I'm sure some small niche communities use it, but that's neither here nor there. The primary issue is that this wiki is a voluntary, in-your-own-time deal, even for the admins. Nobody's getting paid to do this, we all have other things going on in our lives. The Discord is itself something only some of us keep tabs on, and not even every portion of it. You're asking people who are already pretty stretched to keep track of something else just for you. I'm sorry, but that's not feasible. --M Sipher (talk) 16:21, 18 April 2026 (EDT)
check what i said about memoserv. memoserv does not require much tracking, only logging in. can there not be 1 admin registered on rizon server? -- Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot (talk) 10:43, 19 April 2026 (EDT)
You have already been told no and given reasons why by three different administrators. The decision is not going to change. Please drop the subject. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 12:14, 19 April 2026 (EDT)
how about this? no channels. 1 login to rizon server every 120 hours or higher intervals to see if i have sent any memos. possible? -- Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot (talk) 10:42, 20 April 2026 (EDT)
I legitimately do not understand why you expect admins to bend over your request on building an infrastructure that you're tacitly admitting only you would use, lmao (FortressMaxxing (talk) 10:59, 20 April 2026 (EDT))
No. --M Sipher (talk) 12:10, 20 April 2026 (EDT)

When does controversy surrounding a figure prove worthy enough to mention?

[edit]

Thinking about the whole Nexus and ss86 astro situation rn, it kinda feels like theyre the elephants in the room that we probably have to acknowledge. However, they're not documented. Makes me wonder: any criteroa I should follow seeing these types of situations before its eligible to memtion here?Poliwag06 (talk) 22:37, 27 April 2026 (EDT)

I think you need to stop giving overinflated importance to opinions you see online. Saix (talk) 22:42, 27 April 2026 (EDT)
Nobody cares, Moby. --M Sipher (talk) 23:35, 27 April 2026 (EDT)
...I guess I'll take that as "never allowed" then.Poliwag06 (talk) 23:40, 27 April 2026 (EDT)
What controversy is this supposed to be? S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47 (talk) 00:32, 28 April 2026 (EDT)
The complaints about Nexus not being a combiner and the many, many criticisms of SS86 Astrotrain about inaccuracies/proportions etc. (Ok maybe the latter can somewhat be ignored because its just people critiquing his flaws once they got him in hand+stock images+they dont like how he looks compared to Siege).Poliwag06 (talk) 00:52, 28 April 2026 (EDT)
People were whining about Nexus info from leaks before the post on Mark Maher's personal Instagram account and actual announcements by Hasbro confirming that yes, Nexus is a combiner frame compatible figure that can fit into the AOTP Superion, and yes, Nexus is going to be a full combiner later in 2027, we just don't know what that'll look like and I hope it's a full commander class combiner frame and four deluxe limbs (neither are confirmed as of this minute). The discourse over him not being a combiner is from stolen and unreliable info, so why add more fuel to a flame that people started themselves less than a week before the actual reveal of the Voyager figure? -[ Singularity (talk) 02:11, 28 April 2026 (EDT) ]
Is this just about the fact that SS86 Astrotrain looks like ass? If so... I'll be the dissenting voice here and say that yes, there should be space to maybe mention the general reception of a given figure into a toy section, as long as it reflects the broader evaluation of the community and doesn't just become an editor's sole personal gripes with a given toy. With SS86 Astrotrain, I do think the consensus is pretty settled at least (though I have no idea about what's up with Nexus Prime). (FortressMaxxing (talk) 01:00, 28 April 2026 (EDT))
Nexus complaints are mostly hes not a gestalt (source: prematurely released images) and his alt mode being a flying brick, though it has settled down a bit when people got their hands on him. I think the former may or may not be connected to why they had to post that pic that he had a torso mode (which is apparently not shown on the box or called out, much like Sideways' head swapping).Poliwag06 (talk) 01:05, 28 April 2026 (EDT)
You yourself said "source: prematurely released images" so why are you complaining over stolen pictures that had little to no context to them since they were leaks? Most if not all of the complaints about the figure being "not a gestalt" were dissuaded with the info given to us from the official reveal video (linked in the references of AOTP Nexus' article) and Mark Maher's post of Nexus wearing Superion (also linked in the references of AOTP Nexus' article). Also, "his alt mode being a flying brick" is a matter of taste. Nexus fits perfectly with my Diaclone Jumpstarter redecos as Topspin and Twin Twist are now combiners thanks to Titans Return. - Singularity (talk) 02:11, 28 April 2026 (EDT) ]
The Nexus Prime thing really feels like a matter of OP just not liking this one toy tbh, I really haven't seen a lot of people complaining about it (FortressMaxxing (talk) 02:20, 28 April 2026 (EDT))
No, Im fine with Nexus. But yeah, whatever I saw was from illegitimate material floating around, and I probably just...didnt notice people had gotten over it (TvTropes and Emgo mentioning it probably further made me think so despute said sources being as reliable as Sideways. Now I feel like I raised this topic that I had no idea how to phrase and now have to live with it...Poliwag06 (talk) 02:28, 28 April 2026 (EDT)
We are absolutely not mentioning every time some people somewhere bitch about a new toy that's months away. --M Sipher (talk) 01:18, 28 April 2026 (EDT)
Undeestood.(Sorry I brought it up)Poliwag06 (talk) 01:22, 28 April 2026 (EDT)
Unless something is a big enough deal that it leads to toys being recalled, it's probably not worth mentioning on the wiki. (Also, that Nexus "controversy" is based on leaks, and you've been here long enough that you should know our stance on leaks.) -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 01:26, 28 April 2026 (EDT)

Toy entry idea: links to Hasbro Pulse and TakaraTomy Mall entries for modern new releases

[edit]

We have long linked to tfu.info pages at the bottom of toy entries, such as on "Shockwave (G1)/toys". How about we link to Hasbro Pulse and TakaraTomy Mall listings for modern toys when said listings go up? It may incite more contributors to remember to save snapshots of those relevant webpages on the Internet Archive when the official listings eventually get removed in due course. S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47 (talk) 02:56, 7 May 2026 (EDT)

I can get behind this, I'm usually first to add those individual websites from Takara Tomy when available, if that's a new mandate I can help. –MahXyme/MahXymal (talk) 16:56, 9 May 2026 (EDT)


"Canceled media" template

[edit]

With the recent creation of the "Canceled video games" category, I can't help but wonder: in the same way that we have a little template for canceled toys, shouldn't we also have one to add to the top of the page of media that was canceled and never saw an official release? Seems like it could come in handy! (FortressMaxxing (talk) 12:30, 12 May 2026 (EDT))

I'm in favor. Plenty of canned comics and an entire dumped franchise in Transtech to justify it. MCRG (talk) 13:00, 12 May 2026 (EDT)
Agreed. Definitely something that would be pretty useful for a lot of articles! - IGEBM13 (talk) 22:04, 12 May 2026 (EDT)

Digging into the Beast Machines/Transtech Era

[edit]

Just throwing a note in here that I'm getting in contact with some folks who were on the Transformers team during the Beast Machines/Transtech era, so I'll be adding notes, fleshing out some things, and adding design credits where I can. Like with the G2 ad creators, I'll post up the full emails on the relevant discussion pages as I get permission. MCRG (talk) 13:04, 12 May 2026 (EDT)

Nice, I'm excited to see where this goes! (FortressMaxxing (talk) 15:32, 12 May 2026 (EDT))