MediaWiki talk:Community Portal: Difference between revisions

From MediaWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
IGEBM13 (talk | contribs)
 
(384 intermediate revisions by 50 users not shown)
Line 31: Line 31:
<!--END ARCHIVE NAV INCLUDE-->
<!--END ARCHIVE NAV INCLUDE-->


== Press release or logo for 30,000 articles? ==
Is it worth putting something together as we get very very close? Maybe something like:
* 3 from Thrilling 30 logo
* 0 from the 40th logo
* 0 from the Vector Sigma "Featured" logo
* 0 from the cosmic-streaking O in the TFTM opener
* 0 from GO!


Just a suggestion.... --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 13:45, 10 November 2023 (EST)
== Binder of Revelation Illustration Credits ==
:If we wanted to go down that route, maybe tie into some of the contemporary material? Say, the "O"s from [[Energon Universe]] or [[Transformers: Legacy#Legacy: Evolution|Evolution]]? (Though the latter isn't exactly straight-on...) --[[User:Broadside|Broadside]] ([[User talk:Broadside|talk]]) 14:38, 10 November 2023 (EST)
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)
::Sure! I lean towards the Energon Universe choice. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 15:48, 10 November 2023 (EST)
: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)
:Apologies, I've corrected the count on the main page as it was inaccurate, so we're not as close as it looked like we were. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 16:20, 10 November 2023 (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. [[User:The Wadapan|wadapan]] ([[User talk:The Wadapan|talk]]) 00:26, 26 November 2025 (EST)
::That just means we have more time to decide and, if so, pull things together. :) -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 16:51, 10 November 2023 (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.[[User:MCRG|MCRG]] ([[User talk:MCRG|talk]]) 14:41, 26 November 2025 (EST)
:::Feels like we just leapt up 40 new articles in the last 2-3 days. Is it worth putting a graphic together? --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 22:47, 18 January 2024 (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.--[[User:MCRG|MCRG]] ([[User talk:MCRG|talk]]) 15:23, 21 January 2026 (EST)


=="Multi-pack" vs "gift set" and suchlike==
== What are we calling the new "Core" Transformers stuff? ==
Incoming semantics, but... as I've been going through the toy entries, been trying to standardize/streamline a lot of stuff, and I think maybe a set of consistent terms/definitions for "a bunch of separate toys packed together" is in order. So lemme throw this out here for discussion/future reference...
*'''Multi-pack''' — A pack of toys where the contents (or at least most/some/any of them) are exclusive to this release, not sold in other packaging. Most multi-toy releases nowadays would fall under this umbrella by default.
*'''Gift set''' — A pack of toys where all of the contents are/were concurrently (or close enough) sold individually as well, without changes, in the same market. Like all the various G1 combiner sets.
The latter brings up the question of if we want to label all the Takara "VS" packs and the various UT-era "VALUE PACK!" sets under that umbrella, which I'm ambivalent-to-marginally-in-favor-of over. Especially as Takara's been putting out new "VS" packs where the toys are new decos not available elsewhere... also we kinda made up the "VS pack" term anyway, as memory serves, so. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 20:15, 8 January 2024 (EST)
:Hasbro has used the word "[[Giftset]]" to refer to unique variants not available separately. I'm inclined to think we shouldn't directly contradict that. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 21:21, 8 January 2024 (EST)
::and damn but does that article need updating. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 21:22, 8 January 2024 (EST)
:::I'm inclined to think that Hasbro uses lots of terms in ways that are not exactly conducive to organizing a wiki. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 21:29, 8 January 2024 (EST)


==More bullet point insignia?==
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)
Okay so... I recall there were some other possible faction symbol bullet points we could maybe use. I ran across a few with this batch of toy pics we might consider adding. I'll list them here, see if people can think of more. I feel like there might be a couple more two-faction matchups out there.
* Rescue Bots
* The various BotBots squads
* My First Transformers


I'm not un-convinced that we should have the bespoke insignia for stuff like the Disney Label, since they do use them on the packaging. So uh... there. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 01:51, 13 January 2024 (EST)
:I was JUST adding a section here and rather than rewriting...<br>
:Also, while looking at the list of all the bullets on the template page... maybe we should see if we can split the list up a smidge? Like, put all the mutli-faction icons in one section, a section just for BotBots since there's gonna be quite a few of them? Alphabetizing them might also be in order. (I have exactly zero idea how those templates are coded, so uh, lemme know if that's doable.) --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 04:42, 13 January 2024 (EST)
: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)
::There's also the [[Star Wars Transformers]]... though I'm not sure if using ''Star Wars'' insignia falls too much out of this wiki's scope, although we do use at least use them on the actual characters' pages (see [[Darth Vader]]). [[User:Turborun|Turborun]] ([[User talk:Turborun|talk]]) 10:34, 13 January 2024 (EST)
::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)
:::I don't think we'd use SW insignia because, near as I can tell, the toy packaging doesn't mark the toys that way. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 05:27, 14 January 2024 (EST)


== Idea for reducing the size of toy sections by compacting unchanged toy entries ==
== Size of the page again ==


I've come up with an idea that I think would make toy sections on character pages a little better and more intuitive. Instead of having a long list of entries for multiple releases of the exact same toy completely unchanged, we could just compact them all in a single entry, describing how the toy was available both individually and unchanged in a bunch of multipacks. This could be especially helpful with toy sections that are way too long, such as both the Movie Optimus Prime and Bumblebee toy pages that have been subject to a lot of discussion already.
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)


[[User:Fritz/Optimus Prime (Movie)/toys|I used the 2007 Legends Class section of the Movie Optimus Prime toy page to make a quick example out of it.]] The entries would be reduced from four to two toys, since 3/4 of them are the same toy anyway, and a lot of white space would be removed. As for the images of the multipacks, I don't think we would be losing much in removing them since the wiki has never prioritized images of packagings for anything really and, as I know is written somewhere in the "rules", the wiki isn't supposed to be used as an image hosting website in the first place.
== Idea for a page? ==


So, any thoughts? --[[User:Fritz|Fritz]] ([[User talk:Fritz|talk]]) 20:18, 20 January 2024 (EST)
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)
: We used to do this and it was actually kind of worse. There's also complications when unchanged toys end up being sold under different franchise headers, and when you add in all the other bullet point data a toy/set might have, you could end up with a lonnnnng list of bullet points before you get to the actual writeup, plus describing the multi-packs' contents... you're not really saving space while also kinda hurting the demi-chronological flow of the information. And deleting the multi-pack package imagery feels very wrong. It's one of those cases where there's no real ideal situation, but there's a least-bad one.
: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 said, it probably wouldn't be a bad idea to make sure the first entry mentions these "repacks" alongside the redecoes and links to the relevant items. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 21:34, 21 January 2024 (EST)
::seconded. frankly shocked to learn there isn't one already --[[User:Arren1234 |Arren Meuchel]] [[User_talk:Arren1234 |(talk)]] 11:58, 30 January 2026 (EST)
::Good points, as usual. Now that you mentioned it, I think I do have a vague memory of this being done in the past. I was going to suggest the repacks from different toylines should remain separate, though. My mentality was that maybe we could have a way to highlight the "main" releases (original and redecoes/retools) from the "minor" ones (unchanged repacks) to make it easier to identify in a glance how many actually-different toys were released within a toyline, but I wouldn't want it to cause ''more'' confusion than ''less''. Anyway thanks for taking the time to evaluate the idea. --[[User:Fritz|Fritz]] ([[User talk:Fritz|talk]]) 05:54, 22 January 2024 (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.” [[User:Cylasbreakdown|Cylasbreakdown]] ([[User talk: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]]. —[[User:BluJayWarrior|BluJayWarrior]] ([[User talk:BluJayWarrior|talk]]) 18:01, 4 February 2026 (EST)
:::::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)
::::::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)


==Repurposings, continuity transplants, and using Template:Main/Template:See to improve navigability==
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've gone back to the drawing board to come up with a way to signal to readers where closely-related pages exist, as I don't think [[Help:Disambiguation|disambiguation]] pages are enough and have found [[Template:OtherVersions]] to be unideal. [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive70#Proposal re: G1 pages|Previously]], I'd suggested merging a bunch of pages for so-called "[[Continuity family|continuity]] transplants", but other users convinced me this would be a poor solution. One alternative suggestion, from [[User:Broadside]], was to use [[Template:Main]] to put key links to a character's appearances in other continuity families directly in the fiction section—[[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive70#Handling of "former GoBots" and "former Diaclone" characters on the wiki|reactions at the time]] were neutral-positive. You can see mockups for [[User:Broadside/Sandbox:Cy-Kill|Cy-Kill]] and [[User:Broadside/Sandbox:Bug Bite|Bug Bite]]. This strikes me as the best of both worlds, because it keeps the consistent schema (which helps for page length and organisation) but also puts a link to the information in the place where your typical reader is expecting to find it (on the page for the highest-profile first incarnation of the character).


With the same philosophy in mind, I've also designed two new templates. The first, [[Template:Toyappeared]], is intended for use in toy write-ups as a way of linking to fiction write-ups and character pages. It covers [[repurposing]]s, "continuity transplants", notable instances of [[Show-accuracy|toy-accuracy]], in-fiction [[Reformatting|powerups]], [[Redeco#"Virtual" redecos|"virtual" redecos]], you name it. Toy write-ups are increasingly being duplicated across multiple character pages, which creates maintenance overhead, as both instances must be manually kept in sync. My suggestion is to use [[Template:See]] to link to the full information regarding a toy on the original page, with the repurposed instance giving only brief information of what the toy is and ''why'' it was repurposed or whatever. The second of my new templates has a much more specific intended use case: [[Template:Bwucharacter]] provides an easy way of explaining how/why a character was reinterpreted for their ''Uprising'' appearance, as ''Uprising'' accounts for most of the situations I view as being problematic.
==About character name translations==
Um... I'm new here. I have a question, and I'm not sure if this question falls under [[Help:Official info]]...


I realise I'm proposing like five things at once here, so [[User:The Wadapan/sandbox/repurposing|my sandbox]] has [[User:The Wadapan/sandbox/repurposing#Full example|a full example]] demonstrating how it all works together, along with tons of individual examples of the templates' usage and a more thorough explanation of what I'm trying to address with them. Take a look, and let me know which aspects you like, which parts you don't like, or any ideas you have to add! —[[User:The Wadapan|The Wadapan]] ([[User talk:The Wadapan|talk]]) 06:24, 12 February 2024 (EST)
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 can vouch for these templates! [[User:ShootingStar7X|ShootingStar7X]] ([[User talk:ShootingStar7X|talk]]) 15:38, 26 February 2024 (EST)
: I'm seeing a lot of problems with the implementation of some of this, and a lot of future headaches. The ones rolled out put what look like stub headers in a fiction section with just a small normal missable note up top; and in Override's case in specific, multiple stubs with completely redundant information. What this is ''going'' to do is get new people thinking that these are missing information that needs to be filled, then we gotta revert it and tell them no all that goes elsewhere, which is utterly unintuitive and will just lead to arguments and headaches all around.
: As for toys, in the instances of BWU-type stuff where it's a one-toy Mini-Con or whatever, I feel like NOT having the actual toy info for them on the BWU page, as with the Mini-Con Snow Cat toy currently, is not doing the reader any favors. Quite the opposite. Why are we making them jump to a different page for information that has no reason to not be right there? I don't like making readers jump through hoops needlessly, and that's all this feels like. And it's not like the toy sections of most of these are gonna see major changes, so lack of cross-updating is very, very, very unlikely to be an issue.
: I really don't think these require new templates and a bunch of new-editor landmines. At most, there's a decent argument to be made for re-positioning the "you look familiar" template that already exists, maybe below the main character writeup (above feels like a bad layout choice, pushing all kinds of stuff down.) --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 02:11, 28 February 2024 (EST)


== Listings and accessories ==
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?


When I was making the description for cannonball based on the Walmart listing, there was mention of a Gatling gun and hammer not shown in the stock images,and left them out.
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?


If I run into this type of situation again, what do I do?[[User:Poliwag06|Poliwag06]] ([[User talk:Poliwag06|talk]]) 10:56, 7 March 2024 (EST)
:I suddenly realized that 塔恩 could be used. The packaging of Blokees does indeed call him 塔恩.


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


Gallery pages should only include images that aren't easily accessed by going to the main page, to avoid cluttering. I guess this is not an issue now since the current gallery pages are fairly short.
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)
: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)
::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)
:::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)


There should be more dedication in listing alt-modes of characters. Maybe there should be a header or something. For example, if the Dreamwave version of [[Sunstorm (G1)#Dreamwave Generation One continuity|Sunstorm]] transforms into an F-16 jet, it should be listed in the beginning with a header for the sake of easy access to the said information.--[[User:Primestar3|Primestar3]] ([[User talk:Primestar3|talk]]) 13:59, 17 March 2024 (EDT)
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?


== Will we get an article on The Masked Singer? ==
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)
: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)
::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)
OK, I will do it this way. Strictly follow the official materials.


Will there be an article on TFWiki about The Masked Singer, specifically their recent "Transformers Night" episode (https://the-masked-singer.fandom.com/wiki/Transformers_Night)? --[[User:John Pannozzi|John Pannozzi]] ([[User talk:John Pannozzi|talk]]) 20:01, 12 April 2024 (EDT)
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)


: Assuming it's a licensed appearance (I can't check the credits myself :C ), I can't think why it wouldn't be [[User:AkibaSilver|AkibaSilver]] ([[User talk:AkibaSilver|talk]]) 21:15, 12 April 2024 (EDT)
== So when are we splitting the Legends World characters off? ==


:: It was indeed licensed. --[[User:John Pannozzi|John Pannozzi]] ([[User talk:John Pannozzi|talk]]) 22:30, 12 April 2024 (EDT)
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)
:::Yes, as an official Hasbro-sanctioned piece of TF media, the episode does meet our requirements for inclusion. It just needs someone to write it up. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 23:22, 12 April 2024 (EDT)
<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)


== Franchise articles ==
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)
So I was looking at the franchise pages to try and get an idea of what the standard is supposed to be for how they are written. Should all of them be updated to be more like the [[Beast Wars: Transformers (franchise)]] article? What was making me wonder this was that on the [[Transformers: Energon (franchise)]] article it had a section for "Homages" and one for "New characters" which I don't think any other franchise article has. --[[User:1levichurch|1levichurch]] ([[User talk:1levichurch||talk]]) 22:57, 21 April 2024 (UTC)


== AI upscaled images ==
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:
With fresh offsite talks about the matter, I put forth we add an official policy against posting AI upscaled images of any kind to the wiki, owing to their subpar performance in "enhancing" the quality of images. [[User:McBaggins|McBaggins]] ([[User talk:McBaggins|talk]]) 23:52, 1 May 2024 (EDT)
*'''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
:Agreed. It's literally faking information and presenting it as official. (Also often noticeably terrible.) Sometimes the best quality available of something sucks, but we simply have to deal. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 23:57, 1 May 2024 (EDT)
*'''Lump:''' Roadbuster, Whirl, basically every real person making a cameo
::100 percent agreed. It's called "artificial" for a reason. Plenty of details would be lost out through the upscaling, and several times errors on the wiki somehow became official through Hastak using the wiki for references (the whole [[Circular reporting]] thing). If we start allowing AI upscaled images, then we're likely to have things lost to the annals of time. Potato quality is better than lost quality[[User:Singularity|Singularity]] ([[User talk:Singularity|talk]]) 00:11, 2 May 2024 (EDT)
*'''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
: Sure. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 00:43, 2 May 2024 (EDT)
*'''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)


== Ending addition of high-end statues ==
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)
This is something I doubt other people have noticed, but I'm putting down a tent-peg on it: After having built the entries for dozens of high-end collectable TF statues in the last 2-3 years, from firms like Diamond Select, Imaginarium, Azure Sea, XM Studios, etc., and then seeing most of them either officially cancelled or never spoken of again with no reported purchases, I am going to stop adding such items here. If someone else feels like cataloguing them, great.
: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}}


It really may not be possible for us to keep up with toy-like non-transforming merchandise (figurines and statues) the way we used to. There are at least two ''released'' series of G1 core cast micro-figurines with micro-comics and magnifying glasses, which would have been the rage of the fandom in 2005, that nobody ever got around to adding, and it feels like too much of a chore for me to start. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 10:35, 3 May 2024 (EDT)
: It's an unfortunate but very real thing that once you enter the world of licensed merch, we're ''gonna'' have big gaps. It's... a lot, on top of the "a lot" that is the regular TF toyline and fictional output today. I've said that the work involved in keeping up with all of TF's merch ought to be a full-time paying job, and I genuinely mean it. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 16:39, 3 May 2024 (EDT)


== Transformers Roleplaying Game releases on the front page and sidebar ==
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:


The [[Transformers Roleplaying Game]] is getting pretty frequent releases of both sourcebooks and pre-written adventures, and it occurs to me that it might be a good idea to have it on the "current releases" section of the front page and/or the navigation sidebar. How would people feel about that? --[[User:Broadside|Broadside]] ([[User talk:Broadside|talk]]) 15:49, 4 May 2024 (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.}}
: I think that makes a lot of sense, as long as we have people keeping up with the new releases to document them. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 15:51, 4 May 2024 (EDT)


==How we handle weapons' toy/merch sections==
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)
Okay, so like... I'm not really convinced that what we've been doing is the best way to handle the weapon pages' toys/merch sections. Honestly, they end up looking... really shoddy. There's just tiny scraps of info, vast wads of whitespace, few to no links, the images are tons of different sizes. <br>
: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)
I'm thinking that instead of all this... maybe this is a place where a gallery is in order, just a chronological procession. Have the captions just say what lines/toys the weapons came with and link to the toys directly on the character page. It's not like there's much to say about any of these, why not let the toy listing on the character page say it? Why make people scroll through screens of mostly-emptiness, which I feel they're increasingly unlikely to do? I may do a sandbox if I'm feeling up to it. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 22:24, 6 May 2024 (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)
:[[User:M Sipher/Sandbox:WeaponPageToysSection]] - So... this, basically. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 22:39, 6 May 2024 (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)
:I'd be on board with that. --[[User:Broadside|Broadside]] ([[User talk:Broadside|talk]]) 22:34, 6 May 2024 (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)
:I like it. It would be far more compact than our current approach for, say, [[Fusion cannon#Toys]], while still getting the point across. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 11:13, 10 May 2024 (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)
: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)
::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)
: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)
::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)
:::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)
::::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)


== Out of date MediaWiki ==


==Proposal for Unproduced or Unreleased Template==
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.
I don't think the Apocrypha template is particularly useful. It was created specifically for Alignment, but most of the things in it don't fit that criteria. Something like Unproduced or Unreleased Transformer media would be more self explanatory. [[User:WillR113|WillR113]] ([[User talk:WillR113|talk]]) 07:05, 11 May 2024 (EDT)


== Use of pictures from ebay, fan sites, etc ==
(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}}


Is it appropriate to use pictures of toys from ebay, fan reviews, video review screenshots and the like? Under fair use and with source credit? Sometimes rarer items we don't have good pictures of on the wiki show up in these places. In particular I found a ebay seller with good images of EZ collection toys and and old Japanese review blog with images of Takara variants of HFTD/Autobot Alliance toys so that got me wondering. —[[User:BluJayWarrior|BluJayWarrior]] ([[User talk:BluJayWarrior|talk]]) 10:10, 12 May 2024 (EDT)
== irc needed ==
:Images from eBay and other fan sites have been and can continue to be used, giving the fullest source credit feasible. I don't think we've ever needed to rely on video review screenshots and would always prefer to have a "normal" still image instead whenever possible. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 11:02, 16 May 2024 (EDT)


== ''Fight! Super Robot Lifeform Transformers'' “再構成版” エピソード視聴ガイド "Re-Configuration Version" aka "Re-Constructed Version" Episode Viewing Guide ==
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)


We really need to document the "canon" Japanese viewing order for ''Fight! Super Robot Lifeform Transformers'' & ''Fight! Super Robot Lifeform Transformers 2010'' originally included with the ''Pioneer'' Laserdisc booklets & later apparently revised by [[Hirofumi Ichikawa]] (市川裕文) for the DVD BOX SET 2 Instruction Booklet as it would help clean-up the chronology on many wiki pages here. From what I've been able to gather this particular viewing order differs from both the US/Japan production orders, the US-Airing order and the Japanese-Airing order. So what exactly is the order of the episodes of these two series according to these documents? Does anyone own them and able to list the specific order in which the episodes appear in those LD/DVD "Instruction Booklets" word-for-word? As it stands, we've only mentioned that a "narrative viewing order" exists but do not have it listed anywhere. For further clarification, it is not the order in which the episodes appear on the Japanese DVDs. [[User:Astrobotix|Astrobotix]] ([[User talk:Astrobotix|talk]]) 01:09, 15 May 2024 (EDT)
== When does controversy surrounding a figure prove worthy enough to mention? ==
:While this information would be valuable and is worth documenting, it's unlikely to result in us making any major changes to the way our information is structured. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 17:31, 16 May 2024 (EDT)
:Okay, having seen the booklets in question, it just lists the episodes in production order, continuity errors and all. So...absolutely no change, then. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 20:44, 17 May 2024 (EDT)


== Documenting MSRP? ==
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)


Would it be worth documenting MSRP prices (in usd at least)? For the regular retail classes that's for the most part covered by the [[size class]] page, but we don't keep track of them for more specialty items like Masterpieces, multipacks, exclusives, one-off releases not in a normal size class, special lines like Missing Link, etc. It's something I find personally interesting and would've liked to know for older figures and someone in the future might want to know about today's releases. It can also offer some neat bits of info like how Premium Finish releases were generally one price point up compared to the figure's size or how the upcoming United Cliffjumper multipack is a whole $30 off what the individual figures would cost --[[User:BluJayWarrior|BluJayWarrior]] ([[User talk:BluJayWarrior|talk]]) 14:20, 21 May 2024 (EDT)
== Toy entry idea: links to Hasbro Pulse and TakaraTomy Mall entries for modern new releases ==
:I think this would be very interesting, particularly when you scroll down pages for G1 toys that got multiple reissues like the Seekers, Insecticons, and tape players. It's just that - like the Designer Notes and the proper insignias on each and every toy - it would take forever to add and would probably wind up being one super-dedicated person having to do most of the work. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 14:28, 21 May 2024 (EDT)
::I might try to do what I can, going back to recatalogue everything would definitely be a chore. But at the very least I strongly believe it's something we can and should implement for future toy entries. I've started a [[User:BluJayWarrior/Sandbox|MSRP Sandbox]] to try out a few formats, any feedback is appreciated. --[[User:BluJayWarrior|BluJayWarrior]] ([[User talk:BluJayWarrior|talk]]) 05:18, 23 May 2024 (EDT)
::Cleaned up the sandbox page. Anyone have anything to say about the format? Might try applying Style 1 to a few pages this weekend if no one makes any objections. [[User:BluJayWarrior|BluJayWarrior]] ([[User talk:BluJayWarrior|talk]]) 12:58, 24 May 2024 (EDT)
:::Of those options I like Style 1 the best. As you already noted, the [[size class]] pages covers basically all normal U.S. retail from BW through Legacy, missing things like Platinum and MP. To find contemporary G1 prices, here are some good resources:
:::https://web.archive.org/web/20181125082555/https://pleasesavemerobots.com/vstp/vstptf84.html
:::https://web.archive.org/web/20191114081109/http://pleasesavemerobots.com/vstp/vstptf85.html
:::https://web.archive.org/web/20191114091052/http://pleasesavemerobots.com/vstp/vstptf86.html
:::https://web.archive.org/web/20191114090836/http://pleasesavemerobots.com/vstp/vstptf87.html
:::https://web.archive.org/web/20191114084922/http://pleasesavemerobots.com/vstp/vstptf88.html
:::https://web.archive.org/web/20191114081716/http://pleasesavemerobots.com/vstp/vstptf89.html
:::https://web.archive.org/web/20191114085830/http://pleasesavemerobots.com/vstp/vstptf90.html
:::https://www.tfw2005.com/boards/threads/g1-original-retail-price-listing.1167895/
:::I tried looking for G2 MSRP but couldn't find anything as obvious. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 13:24, 24 May 2024 (EDT)
::::Thanks for the sources, gonna have to sort through that later. Planning to start with new ROTB characters since they're smaller pages and prices can still be found. I've decided to add prices for retail classes for reader convenience; not everyone will know to go to the size class page for them and its not linked often enough to make it reasonable they would. [[User:BluJayWarrior|BluJayWarrior]] ([[User talk:BluJayWarrior|talk]]) 14:22, 24 May 2024 (EDT)


: I'd been working on a project like this a long time ago, had originally proposed adding this to the wiki, but then kinda stopped... mostly because near as I could tell, the MSRP in the 80s was something retailers could just make the hell up. The price ranges for any given toy were kinda all over the damn place, and the MSRP was something some retailers used to go "no really we're cheaper SEE?" then make up some price they supposedly "discounted" down from... you know, the thing that got Kay-Bee in legal-type troubles. I was increasingly unsure how to handle that wild price variance concisely on the wiki. In fact...
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)
::https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PBE2i9vLE6fkr933GQbXosA1cxIqB3CkOSnzW0BMdwc/edit#gid=448439989
: 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)
: Take a look-see. There's at least three different MSRP values for the standard Headmasters, never mind actual sticker prices. Like, I ''want'' to provide this kind of context, I really do, and it's pretty easy once we get to the unified price points of BW on... but for G1 and G2? Woof. That's going to take a bit of mulling. "Average" price maybe, but there's gonna be some Prices Georg here and there throwing shit off. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 16:35, 24 May 2024 (EDT)
::RE: The sandbox... I'm gonna have to vote against Style 1, because, as noted, price info is very likely going to get... cluttered, and the longer that parenthetical is, the worse it is. I'd REALLY like to keep that to just "size class/type (if not obvious) and release year". And don't forget Takara-release prices, which can be more flexible even within a size class... but at least those have been ''extensively'' documented. I think we need to talk about bit more about everything we'd need to cover and ''how'' before we go implementing anything, and get a few more people in on the discussion. (Sorry for all the add-ons, lightly scattered today.) --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 18:18, 24 May 2024 (EDT)
:::Fair enough on the old stuff since that gets convoluted, but the newer stuff is comparatively easier to do and I'd rather start sooner before some MSRP prices get harder to find (ROTB Autobots Unite subline prices seem to have disappeared already). Added the ROTB Airazor page I was gonna start with to the sandbox so you can see how the page might look as a whole. Since you object to Style 1 I added a Style 2 version too. --[[User:BluJayWarrior|BluJayWarrior]] ([[User talk:BluJayWarrior|talk]]) 18:38, 24 May 2024 (EDT)
:::: Assemble the data, sure, but I am going to say do ''not'' actually apply any of this to live articles. Again, there's barely been any time or discussion on a project that is... vast in scope, and we simply do not jump on stuff like this right away, because that means things will get not considered and then we have to re-do hundreds to thousands of pages... and we absolutely do ''not'' do it when there's a giant obvious gap (the first decade of the franchise) that still needs to be considered, as how we handle ''that'' will affect how we handle all the others, because we try and keep things consistent.
:::: Like, just off the top of my head, there's non-US-or-Japan markets to consider for just about everything normal-retail. Which makes me think we may want to look into a collapsible template, like with the toy designers and voice actors, to handle the other markets without overloading the bullet point sections, some of which are already a bit husky. There's the fact that Walmart and Target just dropped the prices on TF Deluxes in the US... but apparently, Hasbro didn't change their "MSRP"/cost at all. In fact a quick jump to Hasbro Pulse shows they're still charging $25 for a ''Legacy/Studio'' Deluxe, while I can pop to the local Target/Walmart and buy 'em at $20, so we gotta consider ranges just like with G1/G2. And again... ''I'm moderately convinced that "MSRP" in the USA was bullshit all along,'' so I don't know that it's the term we even want to use in the first place. Maybe "Retail price" would be better. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 00:17, 25 May 2024 (EDT)
:::::I think just documenting the MSRP, if we know it, is enough. No need to go down the rabbit hole of tracking down what individual retailers sell them at when they disregard the MSRP (which as, after all, only a suggested price). In my opinion, at least, it's little different from listing the cover prices of books - the only difference is that Hasbro doesn't print their suggested price directly on the box.
:::::Totally hear you on waiting to the pull the trigger until it's been properly discussed, though. Also, I prefer BluJay's Style 2 as well. -- [[User:Dark T Zeratul|Dark T Zeratul]] ([[User talk:Dark T Zeratul|talk]]) 03:46, 25 May 2024 (EDT)
:::::: Um, the problem is, again... I really don't think we HAVE any actual MSRPs outside of Takara's. What's been cataloged here are just "prices they were sold at", which isn't ''specifically'' a Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price, the specific price suggested specifically by the manufacturer. Those we'd need a source for, and as I've pointed out, the handful of stated "MSRP"s we've seen for Hasbro stuff... well, someone was lying, likely multiple someones. For BW on we have a pretty strong ''inference'' of MSRP, but, well. And even that's not reliable... I just remembered that Walmart and Target were charging markedly different prices for the ''EarthSpark'' Tacticons, like, a $2 diff.
:::::: What I'm saying is, we might want to just not call it "MSRP" because of that (also, frankly I question how many people even recognize that acronym). And because of the wide variance in prices for older stuff, no, we don't need to list every price at every retailer (there were a billion retailers in the 80s... man, remember when actual competition in the market was a thing?), but we really OUGHT to account for the variance somehow, because it can be wide and ''full''. "''Original price''" might be best, since that's what we're actually reporting here, with something like "$2.99 - $4.99 (US) / ¥500 (Japan) <expand>". I'd rather do a range than a single-price "average" on old stuff, especially when we have so MUCH data on what these were sold at across the nation that we can see the trends and when a particularly high or low price is an outlier adn should not have been counted. "Modern" stuff we can certainly ignore, say, Kohl's's higher prices and just do the average probable-MSRP-if-those-actually-exist prices most places (all two of them) charge. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 17:10, 25 May 2024 (EDT)
::::Alright, I'll make a [[User:BluJayWarrior/MSRP Catalog|separate sub page]] to catalog prices for now while that gets sorted out
::::As Dark T said, I think prioritizing initial Hasbro MSRP is best as it is the "intended" price (this is what [https://brickset.com Brickset] does for Lego). It's a point of consistency since historically different retailers tend have slight variations on the price anyway (Target/Walmart sometimes being slightly lower, Kohls/BBTS being higher, general lag on reflecting the msrp price increases a few years ago, etc) and I don't think that whole range needs to be noted. Admittedly the current Target/Walmart prices drops are pretty unusual (a whole $5?!) but unless it becomes something more widespread I personally wouldn't consider it as a data point. Might be worth making a note of somewhere if anything, though I'm not sure where --[[User:BluJayWarrior|BluJayWarrior]] ([[User talk:BluJayWarrior|talk]]) 04:26, 25 May 2024 (EDT)


==Micronauts, etc.==
Why are we suddenly gaining detailed issue write-ups for so much of Micronauts, which contains no TF elements at all?  Isn't that the point of the IDW Hasbroverse wiki?  --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 13:14, 1 August 2024 (EDT)
:Oh and look, now whole issues of M.A.S.K. written 7 years ago with no TF content whatsoever are being pasted from the Hasbroverse wiki.  Is the other site going offline or something?  --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 14:26, 1 August 2024 (EDT)
::I don't think it was really our intention to formally unveil the project until we were further along, but some of us have been doing a fair bit of work towards creating a [https://gijoe.miraheze.org/wiki/Main_Page sister wiki for ''G.I. Joe''] where the [https://gijoe.miraheze.org/wiki/Comics#IDW_Publishing_3 out-of-scope IDW Joe coverage] has already been re-homed. The Joe crew hasn't made any calls about what do with non-Joe stuff to be clear (we're sort of preoccupied, there's so much Joe you guys)  but I'm guessing the idea here is to align the rest with our [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive71#Energon Universe coverage|current approach]] to [[Energon Universe|Skybound's shared universe]] and sundown the IDW one? --[[User:AzimuthAcolyte|AzimuthAcolyte]] ([[User talk:AzimuthAcolyte|talk]]) 15:43, 1 August 2024 (EDT)
:::That is more or less the intention, yeah. The Hasbroverse wiki was built at a time where it was perhaps anticipated to be grander than it ended up being, and it wasn't certain how long it was going to run; with the end result being "not very", having this other vestigial site for what is ultimately not a lot of content just doesn't feel practical. The exception, of course, is pre-V5 Joe, which has ''always'' been the sticking point in discussions about moving Hasbroverse content here, both for the amount and for how little it has to do with the IDW Transformers line. Having a dedicated Joe wiki solves that problem and frees up the rest of the Hasbroverse stuff to be reintegrated. Plus, there's still new Joe material being released to this day; arguably having a complete and better curated site for the franchise as a whole that continues to be updated with new releases is more likely to drive traffic and get other people to contribute than it would be linking to a dead wiki for a long-ended comic line that's had the same featured articles for five years because no one cares to add anything to it anymore. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 15:59, 1 August 2024 (EDT)
::::It does look like a rough consensus was reached to do this back in 2021 ([[Transformers_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal/Archive69#Reintegration_of_Hasbroverse_wiki_content|Archive 69]]), it was just never implemented. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 16:10, 1 August 2024 (EDT)
::Like half of MASK issues have something from Transformers in them. Picking and choosing which select issues to cover here is hair-splitting and obnoxious for readers. It's immensely better to just have all the information in one, easily-accessible spot and regard Hasbro Universe as a de facto spinoff of Transformers, much like Beastformers and Energon Universe are. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 17:10, 1 August 2024 (EDT)


==One spoilers==
== "Canceled media" template==
I propose that information about this movie be withheld until it actually opens in its largest market next weekend--[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 11:04, 14 September 2024 (EDT)
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))
: Agreed. [[User:Locoman|Locoman]] ([[User talk:Locoman|talk]]) 11:08, 14 September 2024 (EDT)
:I'm in favorPlenty 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)


==Transformers One and the conversation we've all been waiting for==
== 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)
On September 12th, Lorenzo di Bonaventura [https://comicbook.com/movies/news/is-transformers-one-a-prequel-optimus-prime-origin-story-exclusive/ clarified the relationship] between ''Transformers One'' and the live-action ''Transformers'' films, describing them as "two universes" that will be "separate". For some, this kind of explicit confirmation may come as a relief after years of wishy-washy answers regarding ''Bumblebee'' and ''Rise of the Beasts'', but it also leaves us with questions on how to best handle ''One''-related information going forward. Around 2015, we adopted a unique layout we applied to all the movie characters, where we organized their movie appearances at the top of the page, regardless of chronological order of release (see "[[Optimus Prime (Movie)#Movies]]"). Obviously, this leads to some questions regarding how we should handle our ''One'' coverage going forward.
:Nice, I'm excited to see where this goes! ([[User:FortressMaxxing|FortressMaxxing]] ([[User talk:FortressMaxxing|talk]]) 15:32, 12 May 2026 (EDT))
 
The way I see it, we have three options:
 
* '''Keep the page format as is, and keep''' '''''One''''' '''up with the rest of the movies''': For obvious reasons I think this is probably our  weakest possible solution; it's pretty clear at this point that our current solution for classifying the films is not really sustainable, and mashing them all together under a single loosely-affiliated umbrella is already confusing and frustrating people who aren't intimately acquainted with the mechanics of the wiki.
 
* '''Reorganize movie character pages so that we acknowledge the live-action films and''' '''''One''''' '''as separate continuities within one continuity family, similar to how our G1 pages cover Sunbow, Marvel, JG1, IDW, etc.''': Historically speaking, this is probably the safest option, but from what I understand there is very little "connective tissue"—visually, character-wise, plot-beats—between the live-action films and ''One'' beyond the inertia of "they were both made by Paramount". As some people have discussed in the past, this could lead to a full or partial reformat of our movie character coverage to more clearly reflect the ambiguous "prequel" status of ''Bumblebee'' and ''Rise of the Beasts'', but this may be a conversation for another time.
 
* '''Separate''' '''''One''''' '''as an entirely new continuity family and split out the relevant information so we have pages for "Optimus Prime (One)", "Megatron (One)", etc.''' Probably the most radical proposal, but this is honestly where I'm at right now: from what I understand the movie is a pretty radical departure from everything that's gone before, with entirely new interpretations of old ''Transformers'' lore—I'd classify it as the start of a new "franchise" in the same way that we distinguish ''Earthspark'' and ''Cyberverse'' despite them both clearly drawing on the same well of post-Aligned lore, and these days "new franchise" is generally synonymous with "new continuity family" for the ease of wiki bookkeeping.
 
We would appreciate hearing your thoughts on the matter! '''As the film is not out yet in all regions please refrain from posting spoilers here'''. [[User:Locoman|Locoman]] ([[User talk:Locoman|talk]]) 08:56, 15 September 2024 (EDT)
 
:I could see option 3 being the way we go, but what holds me back from that is that beyond just Paramount, Spielberg and Bay are still executive producers on the film. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 09:39, 15 September 2024 (EDT)
 
::I think we should put them on the Earthspark Continuity pages to satisfy no-one /j - but yeah, the film is drawing from the same vaguely Binder Of Revelation backstory as everything else for the last 10 years, and unless they have been hiding The Fallen twisting D-16 to evil or the twist that the Creators were the Quintessons all along, One feels pretty decoupled from the rest of the movies. The big issue I see with splitting out fully is that people wondering why we do not do the same for Bumblebee/ROTB, but that more easily passes a "vibe check" as being "Movie-adjacent" and belonging on the same page as the Bay 5-dom than One so far. Agree that trying to put them directly alongside the other movies as a prequel feels both unwieldy and confusing. [[User:AkibaSilver|AkibaSilver]] ([[User talk:AkibaSilver|talk]]) 09:41, 15 September 2024 (EDT)
 
:I vote for '''option 3''', I think creating separate pages is the way to go. [[User:MrRald|MrRald]] ([[User talk:MrRald|talk]]) 09:54, 15 September 2024 (EDT)
::I vote for '''option 2'''. To me the movie is different enough to be a separate universe but not an entirely different continuity. Josh Cooley himself on April 18 when asked whether the film is a fresh start, a prequel to the live-action films, or its own thing, replied with: "yes to all of the above" https://comicbook.com/movies/news/transformers-one-director-confirms-new-movies-canon-status. (And having seen the movie I can confirm those connections to the live-action series do exist). [[User:Grievous Prime|Grievous Prime]] ([[User talk:Grievous Prime|talk]]) 10:05, 15 September 2024 (EDT)
 
:I vote for '''option 3'''. One has always felt very different to the previous live action movies so I feel it should get its own dedicated pages. As for BB and ROTB, there is "connective tissue" to the Bayverse movies so I feel they can stay on the pre-existing movie pages. [[User:PublicCrown|PublicCrown]] ([[User talk:PublicCrown|talk]]) 10:25, 15 September 2024 (EDT)
:Having viewed the film at an advance screening, I think there are easily enough references and homages to previous films that '''option two''' makes the most sense. - [[User:Archforce|Archforce]] ([[User talk:Archforce|talk]]) 10:45, 15 September 2024 (EDT)
 
::I'm favorable for the '''3rd option''', it is still produced under Paramount & there are some producers attached to the project that were on previous movies, but my stance is that we should judge based on the final product & having seen the movie, it doesn't try to be in line to what came before (there are some similarities in design & names, but it stops there since every popular TF stories has influence over the next ones), helped by the new team of writers & creatives. If we can treat each new cartoon as its own entity (even tho in recent years they are streamlined in some areas), I think we can do the same for the recent movies that have more contradictory elements to the Bayverse –[[User:MahXyme|MahXyme/MahXymal]] ([[User talk:MahXyme|talk]]) 10:49, 15 September 2024 (EDT)
:'''<nowiki>#3</nowiki>''' is the cleanest option to me. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 11:32, 15 September 2024 (EDT)
 
:I think from a practical perspective, '''#3''' is the only real option. Looking at the loose guidelines for a new family on our [[continuity family]] page:
:*"a fresh continuity" — Yep, even Lorenzo's acknowledged this. Even if we questioned that, there's stuff like the AllSpark being absent (with the Matrix pretty much taking exactly the role the AllSpark would have), Megatronus being a good guy, and Sentinel's role being entirely irreconcilable with Dark of the Moon.
:*"within a separate franchise" — Yep. New franchise, and the marketing hasn't done anything to allude to the live-action films specifically.
:*"significantly different in cast, theme, style, etc." — This is the big sticking point for me. One makes no attempt to align with the visual style or characterisations of the live-action films. The sole real connective point is B-127 (name from ''Bumblebee'', he has the big cheeks and antenna of the movie guy, and his talking a lot is clearly a meta-gag about him losing his voice), but even he's characterised completely differently, as the "comedy crazy guy" who's a peer to Optimus and co instead of the cool-but-rude big brother figure from Bay/Bee/Beasts.
:I'm sympathetic to the Paramount/Bay/Spielberg/Di Bonaventura connective tissue, but my big rebuttal there is that we don't consider ''EarthSpark'' to be Aligned because Nicole Dubuc is the showrunner. Ultimately, if we hadn't had pre-release producer statements (now contradicted) calling it a prequel to the other movies, there's absolutely no way this would be in question — we'd already have it as a separate continuity family. And from a wiki organisation standpoint I don't think there's any way to, say, write up Sentinel Prime's opening paragraph in a way that adequately covers both the DOTM and One characters without genericising it to the point of uselessness. --[[User:Broadside|Broadside]] ([[User talk:Broadside|talk]]) 12:33, 15 September 2024 (EDT)
::Yeah, I think '''#3''' is straightforward and likely the approach we'd take if we were presented with the film, as a story, with zero context on the studio releasing it or EPs involved or whatever. I also think there's a high likelihood that the next live-action film will have Elita appear and be like "hey Optimus remember when we were in Transformers One?" and we'll all groan and have to reconsider, but until then, I think the real-world context is basically the only thing separating One from just being the next Broadly Aligned-y New Thing like Cyberverse and EarthSpark before it, which we consistently split out for organisation reasons. [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]]) 13:45, 15 September 2024 (EDT)
:Toss me in for '''Option 3''' of an entirely new continuity given how ''different'' the story details has been laid out when compared to the original 2007 film-verse and then later what's set by ''Bumblebee''. --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] ([[User talk:Lonegamer78|talk]]) 14:38, 15 September 2024 (EDT)
:Voting for '''option #2'''. While we would still have the outlier of TF:TAM 86 being a theatrically released movie in the G1 continuity family, I see no reason why "movie continuity family" would not only include transmedia spinoffs from feature films (''Reign of Starscream'', toy redeco Tech Specs, etc. etc.) but also feature films which are belonging different timelines and story universes. This would also free us from having to reconcile Movie 'Bee's history -- did he come to Earth in the 1940s or the 1980s? -- and put to bed *that* long running argument about whether the Bay-directed films were the same universe as BB and RotB or not -- now they don't have to be! [[User:Banpei the Mini-Con|Banpei the Mini-Con]] ([[User talk:Banpei the Mini-Con|talk]]) 14:58, 15 September 2024 (EDT)
:Having seen the movie, I think '''#3''' is our cleanest option. Between the Lorenzo interview and, without going into spoilers, the numerous discrepencies there are, I don't think we can get away with suiting it out ala G1. The time may come when we do that for Bumblebee onwards but as far as One goes, I say we treat it as a new continuity. [[User:Ezim93|Ezim93]] ([[User talk:Ezim93|talk]]) 19:53, 15 September 2024 (EDT)
:'''#3'''. #2 was close for me, but TFOne (having seen the movie) is so artistically different from the live action movies, it feels pointless to keep it on the same page like G1/IDW. Ironically, we could give Bayverse/BB&ROTB the G1/IDW treatment. [[User:Boingus|--Boingus]] ([[User talk:Boingus|talk]]) 23:23, 15 September 2024 (EDT)
:I think 3 is where I'm leaning after seeing the film. Keeping this as "movie continuity" simply because it was released theatrically doesn't make sense to me. We wouldn't do that with a new comic or show because it was the same medium, why do it for a movie just because of that? Yes There is some CNA here to the live action films, but it could be argued it has just as much pulled from G1. One is it's own thing in the end. Trying to fit it into the live action movie box just doesn't feel right in this case.--[[User:ParadoxFactor|ParadoxFactor]] ([[User talk:ParadoxFactor|talk]]) 05:47, 16 September 2024 (EDT)
:I vote for '''Option 3''' for all the reasons previously mentioned as well as size concerns. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 09:29, 16 September 2024 (EDT)
:'''Option 3''', I believe the movie was clearly made with a new continuity in mind.-[[User:TitaniumToughGuy|TitaniumToughGuy]] ([[User talk:TitaniumToughGuy|talk]]) 09:38, 16 September 2024 (EDT)<!--
Not sure if this conversation is just for admin, or for everyone, but in the case that it is, I would definitely recommend option 3. as someone who has seen the movie, I can definitely confirm that there is no way that this is connected to either of the movie continuities. [https://tfwiki.net/wiki/User:Levimus2468] 6:24 PM 19 September 2024 (EDT)
 
 
 
PLEASE PUT YOUR OPINION IN THE NEXT SECTION
 
 
-->
===CHECKPOINT (2024/09/16)===
*Votes for Option 1: 1 (96megatron)
*Votes for Option 2: 3 (GrievousPrime, Archforce, Banpei the Mini-Con)
*Votes for Option 3: 15 (Locoman, AkibaSilver, MrRald, PublicCrown, MahXyme, Saix, Broadside, Jalaguy, Lonegamer, Ezim93, Boingus, ParadoxFactor, Khajidha, TitaniumToughGuy, CyberLink420)
As it stands, current consensus is pretty overwhelmingly in favor of Option 3 by a ratio of 5:1. I know it's only been a day, but barring a sudden swell of support for #2, it might be prudent to start switching everything over. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 10:20, 16 September 2024 (EDT)
: I'm reluctant to make actual changes until the movie hits wide release and the general public can make informed input. Give it a few more days. --[[User:Broadside|Broadside]] ([[User talk:Broadside|talk]]) 10:40, 16 September 2024 (EDT)
::::This.  Let people... SEE the movie before we make important decisions.  --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 19:49, 16 September 2024 (EDT)
::::Right. We can wait a few days for more than a small handful of people to see this and base their decision on, you know, '''''the actual movie''''' rather than whatever someone who had something to do with it says ''this'' week, which historically has waffled between "vague" and "contradictory". Hell, even ''now'' some of them are still being all "well maybe it is and maybe it isn't" and frankly I have no faith they won't ride that ambiguity for a long time like they've done since ''Bumblebee''. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 20:49, 16 September 2024 (EDT)
::I've said ever since Keegan Michael Key tweeted as much that One should be treated as a separate continuity. '''Option 3''' for sure. {{unsigned|jmcdavid}}
:'''Option 3'''. I've seen the movie and other users have covered why that seems like the best choice. It feels as different from the previous movies as Prime is from Animated, or Earthspark from Sunbow (which, despite directly homaging/referencing Sunbow, Earthspark is considered separate from). [[User:Ashendawn|Ashendawn]] ([[User talk:Ashendawn|talk]]) 18:01, 16 September 2024 (EDT)
::I vote '''Option 2'''. There seems to be a large focus on whether or not the film fits in continuity with the prior films, but considering how little they fit with each other that feels irrelevant to me. The creators have been rather unclear whether this film should be considered separate from the ongoing live-action series in terms of production, just in terms of universe. If we had a sense this was the springboard for an entirely separate animated film series I'd say Option 3, but it feels unwarranted at this time. [[User:Indridcold13|Indridcold13]] ([[User talk:Indridcold13|talk]]) 20:29, 16 September 2024 (EDT)
:I'm voting '''Option 3'''; much of my reasons are the same as others have stated above, and I do apologise for opening this bags of worms on the ''One'' talk page. It's not that I don't understand why some people are opposed to creating a new set if pages, but for argument's sake, if ''One'' gets one or more sequels, it would likely draw further away from the established live-action films and become its own continuity/franchise (though that's more of a what-if right now). Overall, I personally think that separating live-action films and animated ones into their own continuities is a reasonable option, and I believe that ''One'' has proven itself a different entity. [[User:Prime Temple|Prime Temple]] ([[User talk:Prime Temple|talk]]) 06:26, 17 September 2024 (EDT)
 
::Also  '''Option 3''' . In tone, content, continuity, style, story, just feels too different to me from the Michael Bay and other films, really only having the method of release in common. It feels more separate from the other movies than even Cyberverse from G1, and that’s happily separate. —[[User:MissDaria|MissDaria]] ([[User talk:MissDaria|talk]]) 10:05, 17 September 2024 (EDT)
:Screen Rant: I vote for '''Option 1''' This came out from ScreenRant today. Is Transformers One considered a prequel to the recent movies of Bumblebee and Rise of the Beast or the original live-action film starting in 2007? Or is it something completely, entirely new? ... Lorenzo di Bonaventura: "It obviously exists beforehand. I think we figured it out. It was like 300 million years before the first Michael Bay movie, so if that's a prequel, that's a prequel. But we're really following the lore about where it starts, and so we really just think about it as the beginning of the story. The origin, yes, but literally the beginning of the thing that we've all come to appreciate." https://screenrant.com/transformers-one-lorenzo-di-bonaventura-and-josh-cooley-interview/ [[User:96megatron|96megatron]] ([[User talk:96megatron|talk]]) 10:56, 17 September 2024 (EDT)
::Voting for '''Option 2'''. If adding stuff like Aligned backstory influence disqualifies One from being movie, then there could be an argument for splitting IDW characters off from the G1 pages because of things like the absence of the traditional "Ark crashes on Earth, everyone wakes up 4 million years later" backstory, and no amount of Owning The Bayverse (which I can't help but feel some of the desire to split One off is fueled by) is worth opening that can of worms. [[User:BattleBlade|BattleBlade]] ([[User talk:BattleBlade|talk]]) 12:31, 17 September 2024 (EDT)
:Voting '''Option 3''', y'all gotta stop taking Lorenzo's word as gospel especially over the actual creatives behind these movies. [[User:Jman98|Jman98]] ([[User talk:Jman98|talk]]) 14:25, 17 September 2024 (EDT)
:Voting '''Option 3''', Lorenzo has made multiple contradictory statements in the past, some having been outright proven wrong. He doesn't seem like he's involved enough in the productions in order to make concrete statements about their continuity, nor is he a representative of Hasbro. [[User:TheDarkMage10218|TheDarkMage10218]] ([[User talk:TheDarkMage10218|talk]]) 19:30, 17 September 2024 (CST)
:: While I would agree that splitting it out makes the most sense as I currently see it, lets also not pretend the wiki is under some thrall to the evil boogeyman known as "the fandoms view of Lorenzo" and ignore that multiple creatives for all the movies people like to argue are definitely not Bayverse for realsies have made contradictory statements about whether or not the films are all supposed to be prequels / sequels, and its because [https://x.com/SJ_Broadside/status/1836084548020338988 they are not ubernerds who care about whether this movie perfectly follows the backstory of one from nearly 2 decades ago]. Just personally, I am seeing this like the High Moon Games advertising themselves as a G1 prequel back in the day - for people not like us, all of Transformers falls into the same vague umbrella, so sure, it can be a "prequel" to the rest of the movies, in the same way Optimus Prime is Optimus Prime is Optimus Prime to Hasbro, no matter whether he be G1, Movie, Animated, or Armada. [[User:AkibaSilver|AkibaSilver]] ([[User talk:AkibaSilver|talk]]) 04:34, 18 September 2024 (EDT)
:::Haven't seen the movie yet, but I strongly agree with that comment.  This wiki has never been governed by author intent, and particularly regarding the live-action movies there are too many authors giving too much contradictory intent about contradictory material.  ''We'' made up the concept of a "continuity family," that concept ''we made up'' is now old enough for a driver's license, we will have to continue making our own judgments about which stories mesh with what.  --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 08:45, 18 September 2024 (EDT)
:::: All this, and as to that last point: "continuity family" ''has literally '''NEVER''' meant "all fits into one actual internal timeline"''. There's a reason we used the word "family". We treat the totally-irreconcilable-timelines-having G1 cartoon and G1 comic as part of the same "family" (and BW as well), because of an ''external'' concept of them being "related" to each other by dint of the how and who and why of their creations. And this has held true as we moved forward, the above-mentioned High Moon statements being a very good example. The sheer squirreliness of multiple creatives -and the films themselves- over the past half-decade or so over "continuity" (and let's just dismiss out of hand what a ''voice actor'' thinks, okay), doesn't exactly make me think that the future won't see more squirreliness in whatever comes next. "The existing character pages are too big already" is a more convincing argument for a full-on split, and we got subpages/suites for that problem. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 17:17, 18 September 2024 (EDT)
::::: You all make great points; I amend my reasoning for my choice of Option 3: One deviates stylistically and tonally from the live-action movies, and it isn't even live-action to begin with. [[User:TheDarkMage10218|TheDarkMage10218]] ([[User talk:TheDarkMage10218|talk]]) 22:37, 18 September 2024 (EDT)
:Having seen the movie, I believe '''Option 3''' is the best. It is irreconcilable with the Bay films on several levels (more so than ROTB/Bumblebee). It is extremely aesthetically and tonally different from them as well. I feel that grouping One with the rest of the live-action films simply because they share the same release venue would be akin to grouping Prime and G1. [[User:Paladin Denn|Paladin Denn]] ([[User talk:Paladin Denn|talk]]) 15:22, 18 September 2024 (EDT)
 
:Just got out of the advanced screening, I think '''Option 3''' would be the best option. There's a few details that clash with the prior films in many regards. It has an overall different feel. --[[User:GordonShumway8690|GordonShumway8690]] ([[User talk:GordonShumway8690|talk]]) 22:10, 18 September 2024 (EDT)
 
:Just saw the movie, and I vote '''Option 3'''. This movie ''cannot'' be in the same continuity as the other films, so Option 3 would be our safest bet. [[User:Decepticon Stryker|Decepticon Stryker]] ([[User talk:Decepticon Stryker|talk]]) 01:06, 19 September 2024 (EDT)
 
:Another vote by a movie watcher for '''Option 3.''' Several events in the third act counter what has happened in Bay's films. For the ease of the wiki having it stay separated is the best way to prevent headaches and finger pointing by having it all on the same page. [[User:Singularity|Singularity]] ([[User talk:Singularity|talk]]) 12:21, 19 September 2024 (EDT)
:Does my vote count when I watch it tomorrow? [[User:JasenomousTF|JasenomousTF]] ([[User talk:JasenomousTF|talk]]) 17:27, 19 September 2024 (EDT)
 
:Saw the film yesterday, only delayed a response because I didn't think I could come up with any unique arguments. But a vote is a vote, and mine is '''Option 3'''. [[User:Bobpiecheese|Bobpiecheese]] ([[User talk:Bobpiecheese|talk]]) 19:32, 19 September 2024 (EDT)
 
:Count me among the other votes for '''Option 3'''. After seeing the movie, there really is no possible way to finagle it into the pre-existing Movie continuity, even in an Aligned Continuity "works-if-you-squint" manner. It's absolutely its own thing by the definitions the Wiki uses to separate continuities from one another. [[User:SlimerJoel|SlimerJoel]] ([[User talk:SlimerJoel|talk]]) 19:42, 19 September 2024 (EDT)
 
Just got back from seeing the movie, giving a vote for '''Option 3'''. The film is significantly different in tone, lore, designs, characterization, and story beats from bayverse. Arguably closer to aligned or idw1 [[User:Arren1234|Arren]] ([[User talk:Arren1234|talk]]) 21:31, 19 September 2024 (EDT)
 
:Having just seen the film, it is thoroughly '''Option 3'''.  There isn't a single link in play between this and the live action films, not even in design or animation language.  Hell, you could make a vastly stronger argument for it being a prequel to the Aligned continuity than the films.  Just from an ease of use angle, I also don't think people who are coming in for Transformers One info are going to want to dig through years of irrelevant existing live action film content in the first place. [[User:MCRG|MCRG]] ([[User talk:MCRG|talk]]) 02:16, 20 September 2024 (EDT)
 
:Just seen the film.  Definitely '''Option 3'''.  I was just thinking it would be easier too for newcomers looking for info to not have to encounter a mainpic and write-up that describes a totally different person up top.  [[User:Nu-Priest|Nu-Priest]] ([[User talk:Nu-Priest|talk]]) 09:10, 20 September 2024 (EDT)
 
Coming out of the movie, I was '''Option 2'''. Definitely separate from the live action films, but I think it would be convenient to have all the films (that aren’t extended episodes of a pre-existing cartoon) all under the same umbrella. I do understand the arguments that it’s really different in tone and content from the other films, but so is 2005 IDW to G1. Maybe do a suite page that includes everything One related? Like, Optimus Prime (Movie) Main/Games/Toys/One? [[User:Cylasbreakdown|Cylasbreakdown]] ([[User talk:Cylasbreakdown|talk]]) 20:34, 20 September 2024 (EDT)
:Suiting is only done in instances where a single subject, such as a specific piece of media or a toy section, gets ''so'' big that it starts to overwhelm the page, something that absolutely does not apply to ''One'' yet. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 20:39, 20 September 2024 (EDT)
::Correct me if I’m wrong, but was Shattered Glass Unicron really overwhelming the rest of the page on its own? Or RID2001 Universe Optimus Prime? I figured they were just really distinct and separate from all the ether appearances. Unless there’s something I’m not completely understanding about the suiteing rules (which I admit is entirely possible), I think that hypothetically making a One suite for all the big main characters and their toys would be convenient. [[User:Cylasbreakdown|Cylasbreakdown]] ([[User talk:Cylasbreakdown|talk]]) 11:12, 21 September 2024 (EDT)
:::Shattered Glass Unicron and the female, yellow 2003 Universe RID2001 Optimus Prime pages also have arguments of merging them with the larger articles they were originally spun off from. [[User:Shockwave2018|Shockwave2018]] ([[User talk:Shockwave2018|talk]]) 21:07, 23 September 2024 (GMT-3)
 
'''Option 3'''. After having watched the movie, it's substantially different so as to be disconnected from the live action movies, and I don't like the precedence it sets to lump every movie together from here on out, especially if this one's success inspires future free-standing Transformers movies down the line. I understand it with the live-action movies, because the line was very blurry, but it's pretty obvious that this one is separate. [[User:Thunderwolf|Thunderwolf]] ([[User talk:Thunderwolf|talk]]) 21:10, 20 September 2024 (EDT)
 
'''Option 3'''. I just got back from watching the movie, and it's the option that makes the most sense. There's just too much to connect it to the previous films, and while I do see where Option 2 is coming from I don't even think there's enough in common for it to be in the same continuity family (and I don't think its a good idea to throw every single movie that we're unsure about into the the 2007 family imo). Also taking into account the contradictory statements regarding the movie from producers and higher-ups, I think the simplest and most user-friendly option is to put everything into one new continuity family. If something changes so be it, but based on what we have 3 is the best choice. [[User:Hyperious|Hyperious]] ([[User talk:Hyperious|talk]]) 18:19, 21 September 2024 (EDT)
 
:Might as well throw my vote for '''Option 3''' in too. Even if we keep having this conversation over every new movie they release, it's already very clear that the best ''for wiki purposes'' is to split One from the rest. -- [[User:Fritz|Fritz]] ([[User talk:Fritz|talk]]) 20:23, 21 September 2024 (EDT)
I haven't seen the movie yet, so I don't quite feel right casting a vote here, but I do have one question: to those in favor of option 2, what do you feel makes Transformers One in the same family as the live-action movies, that didn't make Earthspark in the same family as Cyberverse? -- [[User:Dark T Zeratul|Dark T Zeratul]] ([[User talk:Dark T Zeratul|talk]]) 03:39, 24 September 2024 (EDT)
: The fact that Cyberverse and Earthspark are sold as entirely separate franchises, whereas this is just the new movie. [[User:Indridcold13|Indridcold13]] ([[User talk:Indridcold13|talk]]) 07:19, 24 September 2024 (EDT)
::''All'' of the Paramount TF movies have had their own separate franchises. Heck, even the 2010 Movieverse toyline between ROTF and DOTM was its own franchise and it didn't even have a movie. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 18:51, 24 September 2024 (EDT)
 
We've clearly long since moved forward with this but just for posterity now that I've finally made it out to the theater, '''Option 3''' does indeed strike me as the right call. --[[User:AzimuthAcolyte|AzimuthAcolyte]] ([[User talk:AzimuthAcolyte|talk]]) 18:24, 29 September 2024 (EDT)
:I second what Azimuth said, now. -- [[User:Dark T Zeratul|Dark T Zeratul]] ([[User talk:Dark T Zeratul|talk]]) 18:29, 2 October 2024 (EDT)
 
== Privacy Policy ==
 
It occurred to me recently that the Privacy Policy has not been adopted though it has been over fifteen years since it was originally written. I wrote a couple of things in its talk page but ultimately got no response. I then contacted abates on what to do next, he told me I could write up a new intro in the talk page. I did, and it hasn't had a response. The policy is linked to at the bottom of every page on the wiki, so if we could get some activity on its talk page, I'd appreciate it. [[User:Hilfam|Hilfam]] ([[User talk:Hilfam|talk]]) 20:41, 6 November 2024 (EST)
 
==The Thirteen and the other conversation we've been waiting for==
 
Over the last few years, the Thirteen have played a major role in multiple ''Transformers'' stories. However, this prominence--combined with Hasbro's increasingly loose approach their in-universe lore--has also led to increasingly divergent portrayals of the group and its individual members.
 
Around 2015, we took the step of consolidating all the different incarnations of the Thirteen on one page for each, with the rationale that the characters were former [[multiversal singularity|multiversal singularities]], and mostly shared similar backstories and personalities between incarnations. However, even at the time, this was not a completely ideal comporomise. Most notably, the various [[Alpha Trion (disambiguation)|Alpha Trion]]s were not consolidated into one, partly due to length and partly because the existence of his [[Alpha Trion (SG)|murderously insane evil counterpart]] represented a massive contradiction to the entire notion.
 
However, over the years, multiple authors have drastically reinterpreted the Thirteen and their story. The role of "Thirteenth Prime" has been filled by multiple contradictory characters—[[Optimus Prime (WFC)|Optimus Prime]], [[Zeta Prime (One)|Zeta Prime]], [[Sentinel Prime (G1)|Sentinel Prime]]—and individual depictions of the Primes themselves have grown increasingly divergent. "Shattered Glass" Alpha Trion is no longer the outlier, but rather an increasing trend: for instance, ''Transformers One'' features a completely heroic Megatronus who never becomes The Fallen, a Liege Maximo that looks nothing like Loki, and an incarnation of Nexus Prime that does not seem to be a combiner. With these data points in mind--and the potential for even further divergence in the coming years--I and several other editors feel that it may be time to reorganize our Thirteen coverage, splitting them out into individual [[continuity family]]-based incarnations the way we would for stock characters like [[Optimus Prime (disambiguation)|Optimus Prime]], [[Bumblebee (disambiguation)|Bumblebee]], etc.
 
However, if we do adopt this approach, some further problems would need to be solved.
 
* '''How do we handle toys?''' With a few exceptions like ''Revenge of the Fallen'' The Fallen, the toys of the Thirteen are clearly meant to be somewhat continuity-agnostic. ''Age of the Primes'' Solus Prime is about as faithful to her depiction in ''The Covenant of Primus'' as it is to ''One'' or any of the IDW comics in which she appears. Even if we count them as "repurposes" across multiple pages, the format of the wiki means they'd have to be based ''somewhere''...
 
* '''FunPub stuff''': The Vector Prime of "Ask Vector Prime" is clearly meant to be a version of the same Vector Prime who appeared in the ''Cybertron'' cartoon, but at the same time makes reference to off-camera events, such as a time when he and the Thirteen lived in Ancient Greece--would we make a separate "FunPub" page for the Thirteen, or try and work them into Unicron Trilogy pages when necessary? Other similar problems exist: "[[Coalescence]]" is a story that features a movie universe Fallen jumping into the world of ''Shattered Glass'', and AVP established that "The Evil One" of GoBots fame, is another alternate-universe incarnation of The Fallen/Megatronus.
 
Feedback on this proposal is appreciated! [[User:Locoman|Locoman]] ([[User talk:Locoman|talk]]) 11:50, 7 December 2024 (EST)

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))