MediaWiki talk:Community Portal: Difference between revisions

From MediaWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Derik (talk | contribs)
Reading Order: new section
IGEBM13 (talk | contribs)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
__NEWSECTIONLINK__
__NEWSECTIONLINK__


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


{{chapters|title=Specific Discussion Subjects|align=left|content=
{{chapters|title=Specific Discussion Subjects|align=left|content=
Line 20: Line 22:
<br/><div class="list-header">'''Dealing With Vandalism:'''</div>
<br/><div class="list-header">'''Dealing With Vandalism:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Vandalism|Vandalism]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Vandalism|Vandalism]]
<br/><div class="list-header">'''GoBots Sister Wiki:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/GoBots|Discussion on the place of GoBots in this wiki]]
<br/> <div class="list-header">'''Wiki Technical Information:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki:Tech|A Not So Brief Summary of the Horrible Things That McFly and Co. Have Done To Keep This Wiki From Melting Down]]
}}<br/>
}}<br/>
<!--BEGIN ARCHIVE NAV INCLUDE-->
<!--BEGIN ARCHIVE NAV INCLUDE-->
Line 25: Line 31:
<!--END ARCHIVE NAV INCLUDE-->
<!--END ARCHIVE NAV INCLUDE-->


== Mold reusage list ==
I've been working on a list that lists the most reused molds. Sorted after Toyline and alphabetical order. Now I would like to know if this would be a useful piece of information or if it's uninteresting for the wiki. Check out the current poor and far from finished version [[User:Dead Metal/DMsscrapheap|here]]. Should I continue working on it or stop and erase it.[[User:Dead Metal|Dead Metal]] 13:09, 29 July 2009 (EDT)
:It's almost worth it just for that picture. [[User:LiamK|LiamK]] 09:20, 12 August 2009 (EDT)
:I think it would be worth it, just have all this info in one place. That and the comedy possibilities. I can see where it could be considered redundant though. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 17:33, 20 August 2009 (EDT)
::Armada: The Air Defense Mini-Con Team, with 10 to 12 different decos (depending on whether you count minor differences between the Hasbro and Takara verisons or not).
::Energon: One of the combiner limbs. Which one depends on whether you count Hasbro/Takara differences or not (some of the tank limbs in particular are considerably different). Also, do the unreleased Movie Target Scouts count?
::Cybertron would be Legends of Cybertron Starscream (8 different versions, with notable differences between the initial Hasbro and Takara releases) and Optimus Prime (7 versions, also with notable Hasbro/Takara differences), with larger toys Deluxe Hot Shot (5 or 6 different versions, minor differences between initial Hasbro and Takara releases), Sideways (not sure on Hasbro/Takara differences here, therefore 5 or 6 different versions), Crosswise (some differences between Hasbro and Takara releases, 6 versions), Scout Clocker (notable Hasbro/Takara differences, 6 versions) and Voyager Leobreaker (5 to 7 different versions depending on Hasbro/Takara differences for Ligerjack/Leobreaker and Dark Ligerjack/Nemesis Breaker).
::Classics winner is Deluxe Starscream (15 different versions, with Hasbro and Takara releases being considerably different in all instances), followed by Voyager Prime (6 or 7 versions depending on whether the unreleased black Takara convention exclusive counts or not).
::Movie... Deluxe "Concept" Camaro Bumblebee, hands down. There's a running change variant for the Hasbro version (not a Hasbro/Takara difference, the later Hasbro version is identical to the Takara release), depending on whether that counts or not, we're talking about nine or 10 distinct versions here (including ROTF Cannon Bumblebee, who features 2007 Bumblebee's legs). Then there's Voyager Prime (7 definitely different versions, with minor but notable differences between Hasbro ROTF Voyager Prime and Takara's convention exclusive "Optimus Prime Revenge Edition". There might also be minor differences between the battle damaged Voyager Prime from the Sam's Club exclusive Prime/Starscream/Arcee three-pack and the Asia-only "Autobot Optimus Prime" single pack.)--[[User:Nevermore|Nevermore]] 15:13, 13 September 2009 (EDT)
:Damn, I'm starting to think I was retarded just to think of starting it, but I think I'll continue working on it and once I think it's near complete I'll "publish" it and let it be updated by others that are more in the know. Danke für die hilfe werd mich reinhaun.:D [[User:Dead Metal|Dead Metal]] 15:19, 13 September 2009 (EDT)
== Marvel UK issue pages ==
I feel that we need to make a change with how we handle Marvel UK comic issues. The UK comics split most of its stories up over multiple issues, and even reprinted some of the split up in a ''different'' way. This has led the story articles to become bloated with non-story info (covers, letter pages, other comics from the same issue, contests, ads) for multiple issues on a single story page. Also, navigating the UK comic is a pain in the ass, as many issues having two stories (one issue has ''three''!), as well as the reprints.
Here's what I suggest we do:
* '''Make "hub" pages for the individual issues.''' These pages will cover issue-specific things. Those UK cover scans clogging up every Marvel Transformer story? They go here. As does information from that issue's letter pages, ads, TransFormations, and anything else that isn't a part of the actual stories. Also, there will be a list of what each issue contains, mostly the TOC from the issue itself. Non-Transformers backup strips (Machine Man, Action Force) should need nothing more beyond the name of the series and the title of the story unless more info is given in the cover, letters page, TransFormations, Coming Attractions or the like. The TOC will also have links to our story articles.
*'''Leave the story articles mostly unchanged''' The UK comic usually treated the stories like serials (think the early Flash Gotdon films or the original Doctor Who series), so splitting them up makes no sense. Aside from moving the issue-specific stuff to the hub pages, the only changes needed will be removing the story navigation box from the UK-original stories, removal of the UK navigation from the stories written for the US comic, and adding any needed "Reprinted in" links, and putting "Originally printed in" links on the stories written for the UK comic.
Marvel US 33 & 34 (Man of Iron!) and Action Force 24-27 (Ancient Relics!) would be handled in the same way. --[[User:FortMax|FortMax]] 17:40, 1 August 2009 (EDT)
:So you're suggesting that ''any'' issue which contained multiple discontinuous stories get a page for the issue, and a page for both stories?  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 22:37, 1 August 2009 (EDT)
:: Not exactly. Marvel UK is a special case because these multiple discontinuous stories are broken up over multiple issues. We would still have one page for Time Wars. I'll put together a sample tommorow. --[[User:FortMax|FortMax]] 00:51, 2 August 2009 (EDT)
::I have a ''very'' rough example at [[User:FortMax/Sandbox]]. The main reason I feel this needs to be done is because not only does the UK comic non only have multiple stories in each issue, these stories get spread out over multiple issues. For example, [[Time Wars]] was printed over seven issues. --[[User:FortMax|FortMax]] 12:04, 2 August 2009 (EDT)
:::That makes sense... a 'landing page.'  I'm tentatively in favor of it... but I'd like to see what others say.  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 15:40, 2 August 2009 (EDT)
::::I think this is a really good idea, because it enables us to show the very different format of the UK comic. Formats, in fact - something I didn't realise till I completed my collection is how ''very'' different the first 30 or so issues are from the rest. More like a robot enthusiast's magazine than a comic, and much more 'British' in feel. Unfortunately I've only got my scanned copies of issues 1-5 to work from at the moment, but I can mock something up to show you what I mean. --[[User:Tribimat|Tribimat]] 06:25, 4 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::I've never been overly happy that a big, "blockbuster-that-changes-everything" story like Target: 2006 or The Legacy of Unicron only gets one issue, whereas, say, the issues leading up to US #75 get a page each. There's examples of serial storytelling and individual-issue focuses (eg, Prime surrendering, or the introduction of the Wreckers) in each. [[User:LiamK|LiamK]] 09:25, 12 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::I've done a fair bit across the UK comics lately and I'd be hugely in favour of breaking T:2006 (especially) into its component issues - just because they weren't individually named they get lumped together in one article which I think does a great disservice to the story. I'd compare it to a six-issue series like Devastation which gets six pages labelled issue 1, issue 2 and so forth, so I don't think articles called Target: 2006 issue 1, Target: 2006 issue 2 etc. would necessarily be beyond the pale. I don't know how far I'd want to take it though - splitting up stories like City of Fear or Legion of the Lost seems a bit pointless, more so The Fall and Rise of the Decepticon Empire which wasn't meant to be split in the first place. --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] 15:07, 2 September 2009 (EDT)
:::I'm in favour. I also think that a standard link to the appropriate letters page on transfans.net (similar to the way we do tfu.info for toys) wouldn't go amiss. --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] 15:07, 2 September 2009 (EDT)
== Need Disambig Help ==
[[Deathsaurus (Victory)|Deathsaurus]] and [[Landcross (Victory)|Landcross]] need to be moved, but I remember us doing different stuff with the Victory characters, so I didn't know if I should move them to (G1) or (Victory). --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 22:09, 6 August 2009 (EDT)
:[[Transformers Wiki talk:Community_Portal/Archive34#Franchise_identifier_consistency|Relevant]] [[Talk:Star Saber (Victory)#.28G1.29_vs._.28Victory.29|discussions]] suggest "Deathsaurus (Victory)", etc. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 22:16, 6 August 2009 (EDT)
::Okie dokie. Thankee! --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 22:19, 6 August 2009 (EDT)
:::''*Derik growls*''
::::...you growled, sir? --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 22:59, 6 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::Derik likes the G1 parenthetical when applicable. Interrobang hates it with a passion. We are going to put them in Thunderdome.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 23:44, 6 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::Derik thunderously proclaims that the (G1) parenthetical is a reference to the ''umbrella'' franchise that contains all "Generation 1" franchises.  If we truly named characters for franchises, we would have "Optimus Prime (The Transformers)."  We're not-- ergo we prefer to use the umbrella franchise for disambig when possible, and that should apply to Victory characters as well!  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 00:01, 7 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::::Uh, no. More like it's one of those cases where we have to make an exception because the result caused by following the rule would be ridiculously unhelpful. Otherwise we do in fact disambig by franchise. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 00:36, 7 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::::I disagree! -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 00:41, 7 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::With which? You disagree that (The Transformers) is unhelpful despite the [[Talk:Generation 1 (franchise)|conversation on the matter]] (to whit: "Because, having 'The Transformers' be the name of a specific franchise and continuity family would be insanely confusing, when technically 'The Transformers' is the also name of the entire general franchise and continuity family that encompasses everything. Having two different concepts named "Generation 1" is already confusing enough without making it ten times worse."), or you disagree with the fact that we disambiguate by franchise?
:::::::::(The Transformers) is a uselessly ambiguous disambiguation, and it ''is'' a fact that we disambiguate by franchise. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 00:47, 7 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::::But... we don't use the "umbrella franchise" for anything else. We don't do it for the UT. We don't do it for Beast Wars (who some would argue falls under G1). We don't do it for the movies. Why only G1? And "Generation 1" is the name of the franchise, as established by numerous product. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 12:33, 7 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::Bah!  Humbug!  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 22:45, 7 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::::Let's make sure we've got our terminology straight.  At the very top level, we have the [[Generation 1 continuity family]], which, NOT being a franchise, is never used for parentheticals.  Underneath that, we have the [[Generation 1 (franchise)|G1 franchise]], G2, BW, the 2003 ''Universe'', etc.  The G1 franchise is synonymous with "The Transformers", so Derik's point above about how we don't say "Optimus Prime (The Transformers)" is nonsensical.  Every time we say "(G1)", we ''are'' saying "(The Transformers)".  This franchise could be considered an "umbrella franchise" because it contains all the Japanese franchises like ''Headmasters'', ''Victory'', ''Zone'', etc.  So does a ''Victory''-exclusive character get a "(G1)" or a "(Victory)"?  Both technically count as franchise-of-origin.  The only reason I see to get granular about it is to follow the example of the Japanese BW sub-franchises.  For example, it would be perfectly valid if [[Skywarp (BWII)]] were "Skywarp (BW)" instead, but for whatever reason, we've decided those sub-franchises deserve their own parentheticals.  I favor consistency, but I can't think of any clear logic that demands one outcome or the other. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 22:19, 7 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::It's the 'for whatever reason' I'm stuck on.  I don't think we ever actually ''made'' that decision so much as some contribuitors have simply been pushing that view-- thus the periodic outbreaks of "What?  Why the fuck is ''ArticleName'' now at such a retarded location?" followed by block reversions.  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 22:49, 7 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::IIRC, I think that the reasoning was that we ''should'' always be disambiguating by franchise rather than umbrella franchise, so (Victory), (Zone), (BWII) was more correct. Basically, it was a change to make our disambiguating more consistent. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 22:52, 7 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::::I can think of one umbrella franchise we do disambiguate by: the [[Universe (2008 franchise)|2008 ''Universe'']].  With the exception of the "Action Blast" Flash animations, all it does is subsume other franchises, but when a [[Dropshot (Universe)|new]] [[Backstop (Universe)|character]] comes out of it, we use "Universe" as the parenthetical instead of whatever franchise they're from within that.  I've [[Talk:Heavy Load (Universe)#Move to "Heavy Load (Classics)"?|argued against this]], but to little avail. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 23:06, 7 August 2009 (EDT)
==Copyright notice for logos==
I've been spending a fair bit of time lately adding to and updating our collection of [[logos]], but it's occurred to me that of all our thin-ice copyright practices, displaying Hasbro's trademarks is pretty damn questionable.  So I checked out how Wikipedia deals with it, and I think we can pare down [[Wikipedia:File:Radioshack-logo.svg|their boilerplate]] into something that fits our typical copyright templates.  What do you all think? - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 23:16, 7 August 2009 (EDT)
:Logos are something you put out as a metonymic symbol for yourself.  Mangling them or presentignt hem badly is bad... but simply ''presenting'' them should be fine.
:Trademark infringement is an entirely different thing than copyright infringement-- it only occurs if we were trying to use their names/logos to represent ourselves.  Creating "Genuine opportunity for confusion" between ourselves and Hasbro.  We're not using them that way... we're usign them to represent Hasbro, which is entirely proper.
:(It wouldn't hurt to work up a <nowiki>{{logo}}</nowiki> template for image credit though, that underlines that this is Hasbro's Trademark, not an image they own copyright on.)  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 23:37, 7 August 2009 (EDT)
::I've done a [[Template:Logo|first draft]]. Feel free to mangle it so that the language is more sound.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 23:51, 7 August 2009 (EDT)
== A solution for all this Goldbug/Galvatron/etc. madness ==
Would it be possible to design a template or other standard that allows for an intro-style paragraph in the ''middle'' of a page?  So, rather than Fortress Maximus getting a footnote under his intro paragraph about how his Japanese portrayal is totally different, his Japanese fiction section gets its own introductory writeup, maybe complete with its own main pic, with some kind of standard disclaimer that it applies to this particular fictional section only?
This allows us to keep characters who are clearly related in a meta-fictional sense on the same page, while allowing us to acknowledge the vast differences in their characterization and/or backstory.  Then we have a ''much'' smaller debate about who should or shouldn't get such a subsection, instead of an unwinnable argument about disambiguations with all the associated link and header messiness. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] 12:02, 12 August 2009 (EDT)
:That is a very good idea, I like it a lot. But how would that work, will we need a software update or something? [[User:Dead Metal|Dead Metal]] 12:06, 12 August 2009 (EDT)
::<nowiki>=Section title=</nowiki>
::The single equal sign header currently isn't used. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 12:10, 12 August 2009 (EDT)
:::That's because a single equal sign header produces an <nowiki><H1></nowiki>, which should only be used once per page per webstandards. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 12:13, 12 August 2009 (EDT)
::::From a web-standards standpoint, there's no reason ''not'' to use a H2.  I the goal is just to have a horizontal line... um... I bet that can be made to happen, I'm just blanking on how.  ;)
::::I'm not opposed to the idea of a 'mini-bio template' (or something) to call out these kind of mini-bios... but I'm also ''wary'' of them, because I fear that they could become a crutch; a "default" approach used whenever there are different portrayals of a character instead of achieving actual consensus.
::::I '''really''' don't want to discuss this until ''after'' we've come to a conclusion on the Bumblebee/Galvatron thing.  With the original argument deadlocked, (and seriously, calling for an up-and down vote so early into the discussion was ''not'' helpful) it's now spilling over and opening 'new fronts' to argue on.  Any 'wide ranging' layout change we make will stem ''from'' the resolution of that argument.  Attempting to begin such a change now, with the problem unresolved is bad policy, pisses everyone off, and ''could be'' <small>(read: is)</small> interpreted as a pressure-move by one side seeking to advance its agenda by presenting a fiat-accompli policy revision to strengthen its position. :D -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 12:37, 12 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::We probably should mention [[Blaster (G1)]] in this mess as well...
:::::I'm honestly not sure how to feel about the whole thing. My inclination would be inherent personality/concept. So if you have character incarnations who have different origins but their personality ends up being the same, they go together. If you have character incarnations with similar origins but who otherwise act very different, they don't go together. And if you have character incarnations who act similarly, but most have a certain origin as a key part of their identity and one incarnation lacks that origin, that one incarnation would still be different.
:::::Of course... that's obviously a pretty darn subjective thing to be trying to decide on, and I'm not sure it'd be ideal. I'm just really not sure how else to handle it in terms of a way that ''would'' be objective. Seeing as how once you get past continuity/franchise divides, all we have to go on is how the individual stories handle things, which usually aren't clear-cut. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 12:51, 12 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::We've got plenty of evidence that Unicron can create Cyclonus and Scourge out of any robot-- the individual going into the transformation has no bearing on the individual that comes out... it's just a 'stock' body/persona Unicron seems to use a lot.
::::::I suspect that Galvatron is similar.  (Though the evidence to support this view is much more circumstantial.)  Because the dudes who get turned into Galvatrons tend to be ''alive'' going in (unlike the 'doners' for Cyclonus and Scourge) their personality obviously carries more sway.
::::::I think that treating Galvatron like ''that'' makes a lot of sense without dis-servicing the material... but I'm not sure we can reach an consensus to do so.  Can anyone think of any similar instances of a character with wildly different 'incoming' origins?  (Orion Pax doesn't quite cut it.  We'd need a separate origin where [[T-Spoon]] was rebuilt into Optimus Prime...)  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 13:05, 12 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::::Sunbow Dinobots vs Dreamwave Dinobots immediately come to mind.  I've been thinking along the lines of your "Unicron's mass-production type" for a while now.... which still leaves both IDW and Henkei Galvs as outliers.  But even those two weirdos fulfill basically the same character roles in their respective continuities, and there's no evidence Hearts of Steel Scourge was built by Unicron either and he's still "himself".  Honestly I think they should all stay where they are.  --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] 13:25, 12 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::::Cartoon Constructicons. Built on Earth? Brainwashed Autobots? Decepticons who've always been around?
:::::::Any rate, I really don't see the point in moving stuff around. People are actually talking about wiki-wide changes to account for maybe that %0.1 of characters that don't fit neat-and-clean into the way things are set up now. As it stands, I'm not exactly sold on the "mini-profile" proposal, I'd have to see an example Sandboxed up before I could get behind such a thing. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 13:44, 12 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::::Leave it as is.  Galvatron is still more or less the same guy - he's a crazy badass killer guy who wants to betray his masters.  Goldbug is a fucking nonentity.  (On the other hand, is there ANYTHING to suggest that Spotlight: Metroplex doesn't take place in the future and that Bumblebee became Goldbug at some point we haven't encountered yet?) [[User:Hooper X|Hooper_X]] 19:34, 12 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::There's a note on the inside cover that says it takes place immediately before AHM#1.
:::::::::As for the subsection-intro idea, I like it a lot - it's an idea I've had since I first started reading the wiki, and it applies to WAY more than the "0.1%" of characters that have had actual debates around them.  Save the main intro for universally-applicable info, and elaborate on the conflicting details in the subsection-intros.  The big issue I see is overall readability - as Siph says, it'll need some sandbox-testing to see if it would actually ''work'' in a practical sense.  It could easily make our articles even ''harder'' to parse than they are now.  But there's no way to know without trying.
:::::::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 19:50, 12 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::Considering that [[Blaster (G1)|Blaster]]'s page is already set up like that... really, go look at it—there's ''three'' separate intros already, one at the beginning of the cartoon section, one at the beginning of the Marvel comic section, and one at the beginning of the IDW comic section.
::::::::::We'd maybe have one normal Fiction section with Dreamwave and TF/GI Joe, and then three different H2s with "Cartoon continuity Blaster", "Marvel Continuity Blaster", and "IDW continuity Blaster" each with their own separate H3 Fiction section. If that makes sense? --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 20:22, 12 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::Speaking solely in terms of 'the insertion of more time fixing the problem...' Goldbug's 1987 tech-spec says that he possesses the ''mind'' of Bumblebee.  ('tis a very odd phrasing.)  It also notes that he has become <tt>"More serious, assertive, mature than he was. Realizes what others think of him isn't nearly as important as what he thinks of himself."</tt>
:::::::::Now, I happen to think that "Spotlight: Metroplex" presented Goldbug as joking, passive, naive and deferring to what others think instead of trussing his own judgment.  (Caveat: These are subjective judgements, YMMV.)  Which would make "Spotlight: Metroplex" Goldbug is simply Goldbug ''prior'' to the state his tech-spec describes.  He will ''grow into'' being the more assertive etc etc etc individual the tech-spec describes.  It's entirely ''possible'' that at some point in the future Goldbug's mind will be merged with G1 Bumblebee... at which point the character would no longer be in conflict with the tech-spec (but still a distinct character.)
:::::::::Let me stress; I don't think that this is '''likely'''.  But I'm reluctant to make sweeping changes aimed at "addressing this completely irresolvable situation" when the situation is (at least potentially) resolvable.  And in the scenario above, even if the discontinuity with the tech-spec were ''completely'' resolved... we'd '''still''' need a separate article for the character; addressing who he was prior to the merge— just like the [[:Image:Generic decepticons marvel uk 243.jpg|hapless trooper]] Straxus rebuilt into a clone of Megatron is a distinct character.
:::::::::'''Reiterating:''' I am not saying this is the case, I do not think it should go on his page, etc.  I am merely demonstrating that it's ''possible'' to have a scenario where '''even if the problems with the tech-spec were resolved''' this Goldbug would '''still''' need a separate article.  '''With that in mind:''' can we ''back away'' from the <tt>"conflict with tech-spec = new character"</tt> argument (because I don't think either side is actually proposing that [[Beast Changer]] be split into a separate article from [[Noble]]) and start looking at at Goldbug's article for what it ''is''; an odd and '''fairly rare''' circumstance which lacks a clear precedent in the form terms of how we treat other articles <small>(Since Galvatron's article has that's been regularly argued about since it was set up... to a conclusion that "this sucks, but no one can agree about how to do it better" I don't think it qualifies as "a clear precedent.")</small> for which open non-acrimonious discussion is required to determine the best treatment.
:::::::::Now, '''*I*''' see no urgent need to make a decision this second.  '''I propose''' a 4 day cooling-off period where all parties desist working on the article or pushing their points on talk pages so that everyone can calm down and it can be re-visited with fresh eyes on Monday.  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 00:21, 13 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::We should just plainly present the character as the fiction presents him while taking as little stances on anything as possible. The only way to do that, I think, is to have all Goldbug-related information on the "Goldbug (G1)" page, and just give the information, perhaps linking to Bumblebee in the appropriate fiction sections to prevent duplicate information. Having separate Goldbug pages gets the whole process off on the wrong foot, drawing subtle conclusions before any text is actually written. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 00:47, 13 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::::But that's a ''terrible'' way to present (for example) the Marvel comic, where he goes back and forth between being Bumblebee and Goldbug.  To say ''nothing'' of Hot Rod/Rodimus Prime.  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 01:27, 13 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::::You know, the more I think of it, the less certain I become about what works the best for the wiki.  Think of Optimus Prime (G1).  We're mostly pretty happy with his article, right?  But then, sometimes he was rebuilt from Optronix, sometimes Orion Pax.  To me, that seems like a pretty analogous situation to the whole Goldbug / Bumblebee situation.  So, whatever we decide for Goldbug may apply to the cartoon vs dreamwave Optimus Prime.  Or not, just kinda thinking out loud. --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] 01:54, 13 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::::::The Keepers Trilogy established that Orion was a friendly nickname for the 'bot known as Optronix.
:::::::::::::Try to keep up with the retcons man!  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 02:25, 13 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::::::Personally, I think Jackpot (I think it was Jackpot, anyway) sandboxed up the best solution I've seen: make a Goldbug (G1) page, with the Marvel and Sunbow sections consisting entirely of "See Bumblebee (G1)" (and maybe a sentence or two on how he became Goldbug). There's no back and forth from Bumblebee to Goldbug for the continuities where they're one and the same, it eliminates the potential mess that would appear if another G1 continuity decided to make a Goldbug that's not Bumblebee, and it pretty neatly resolves the debate over how the intro paragraph should be written. I'm also going to take this opportunity to point out that the intro paragraph for [[Scorponok (G1)|Scorponok]] says something to the effect of, "this guy is totally different in every continuity." -- [[User:Dark T Zeratul|Dark T Zeratul]] 04:40, 13 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::Wait for the smoke to clear.  We'll decide to do that anyway.  The non-Bumblebee Goldbug clearly has his own independent existence, just like [[Hapless trooper]] does, and (IDW) is a terrible diambig.
:::::::::::::::Also, I'd like to take this opportunity to be a crotchety old man and point out that I think people need to '''chill'''.  IDW introduced a ''bizarre'' retcon involving Bumblebee the same month they announced a Bumblebee series.  Until I'm given reason to think differently, I have to believe who thing is too retarded ''not'' to be related. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 04:59, 13 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::So, why is (IDW) a terrible disambig, Derik? Because some other publisher may use a non-Bumblebee Goldbug later? How is that particularly different from a character from one franchise later turning up in another? - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 16:48, 14 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::::Because in this case it's not a character from another franchise. It would be another version of the same character from the same franchise with the same uncommon interpretation. -- [[User:Dark T Zeratul|Dark T Zeratul]] 18:11, 14 August 2009 (EDT)
== New Featured Characters Template ==
OK, what's with the new featured characters template? --[[User:-Blackout-|-Blackout-]] 05:38, 14 August 2009 (EDT)
:Changes were proposed over at [[Template_talk:Featuredcharacters#Makeover]], sandboxed, revised, various users participated etc.  It's been going on for a few days.  A 'mature' version of the template evolved, and we announced it would go live; giving users 36 hours to object if theyw anted to.  No one did.
:(This is typical.  Most of the time only a very tiny audience participates in talk about template revisions until they're rolled out and catch the rest of the users off-guard.)
:It was expected there would be more commentary after it happened.  What do you think of the revision?  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 06:27, 14 August 2009 (EDT)
::It's not really that different, but I think I preferred the other one. --[[User:-Blackout-|-Blackout-]] 06:59, 14 August 2009 (EDT)
:::That's my initial reaction too.  But I'm not sure if that's just because I was ''used'' to the old one, or if it's actually ''better'' somehow, so I'm giving myself a few days to grow on me before I cast judgement.
:::(IIRC this originally started because the old one needed to be re-coded due to some IE problem... which snowballed into a full-on redesign.  So even if we reverted things template would still need changes.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 07:48, 14 August 2009 (EDT)
::::I mostly like it much better, however...
::::The dotted border needs to be a normal border, IMHO.
::::The default "Human" and "Others" sections are now the wrong colors, and I don't think we really want to have to manually swap the code on every single instance of the Template. [[Eye in the Sky|Example]]... you can see how the "Others" has the nice fleshie color, while the "Humans" are the deeper color that doesn't match as nicely visually. Unless you can figure out how to swap the display without having to swap all the code, I think it needs to go back, unfortunately for your alternating. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 08:04, 14 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::Is this like Crayola defining a peach crayon as "flesh" tone?  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 11:52, 14 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::<nowiki>*</nowiki>snerk* OK, I deserved that. But more like, when I look at the light beige I think "human" and when I look at the orangey-yellow I think "human suffering from jaundice". --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 12:03, 14 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::::Hmm... the reason the 3rd and 4th column's colors were swapped was for their density (grayscale) values so that the template would be more readable the low-color-depth e-readers (there are already ~ a million unit out there, and the category is expanding rapidly.)  But the loose subject-color correlation we've got going on is useful.  I'll take a poke at the template tonight and see if I can't tweak the hues without affecting the density; best of both worlds.  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 14:17, 14 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::::While you're at it, see if you can figure out how to fix the fact that the top and bottom borders of the two outside columns are thicker than the same borders of any columns between them.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 16:58, 14 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::Which browser are you using?  I only have Firefox 3.5, IE 8, and Chrome 3.0 handy at the moment, but it looks fine in all of those.  --[[User:Abates|abates]] 18:24, 14 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::Firefox 3.5.2 on a Mac, FWIW.  You can see the problem on this screen shot [[Media:RHeroesNewFCBorderProblem.jpg|here]].  Even allowing for JPG artifacting, the thinner lines at the top and bottom of the Decepticons column should be apparent in the full-res view.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 21:12, 14 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::::Can you check [http://www.aldenbates.com/fctest.html this page] and see if the borders are correct?  I suspect it's some sort of border-collapse bug. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 22:23, 14 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::::I thought we just sprayed for those things....  Anyway, the test page looks fine, all borders equal.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 17:50, 15 August 2009 (EDT)
== "Murder" Category ==
What is that all about, why is it stuck in flux like "Things that doesn't exist", and why has it magically returned back to its former state after I pressed the "Save page" button? --[[User:-Blackout-|-Blackout-]] 13:48, 14 August 2009 (EDT)
:Well, I'm not a ''scientist'', but I '''suspect''' it's related to the fact that [[:Category: Murder|both pages in the category]] promise to murder you if you don't understand a key concept described therein.
:I have no idea where your edits went; but they're not listed in history.  Maybe it was just a server hiccup?  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 14:03, 14 August 2009 (EDT)
:That's obviously policy related. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 18:29, 14 August 2009 (EDT)
::How can you view that category's history if it doesn't exist? --[[User:-Blackout-|-Blackout-]] 02:50, 15 August 2009 (EDT)
:::How can you view something that doesn't exist?
:::We used to have a policy page specifically forbidding murder as a form of resolving debates.  It got deleted.
:::People are a ''lot'' more civil now.  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 18:34, 20 August 2009 (EDT)
::::I think we might need that page back.
::::[[Talk:Alpha Trion (SG)|I admit that I may have at one point threatened anyone who dared to say that Alpha Trion was one of the 13 without any plausible evidence to back them up with murder using SG Alpha Trion's sword.]] --[[User:-Blackout-|-Blackout-]] 14:23, 24 August 2009 (EDT)
== Login Timeouts ==
I've noticed recently that I keep getting logged out constantly... did we tweak something lately? (I think I had to log back in a good five times while working on Jackpot's article yesterday...) --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 11:50, 19 August 2009 (EDT)
:The system seems fine to me, I haven't got problem like this. --'''[[User:TX55|<span style= "color:#00FA9A">TX55</span>]]'''<small><SUP>''[[User talk:TX55|<span style= "color:#0000CD">TALK</span>]]''</SUP></small> 20:52, 19 August 2009 (EDT)
:No problems here.  Have you tried deleting your site cookies?  That was happening to me on another site (a forum) and the problem went away after I deleted the cookies and logged back in. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 21:09, 19 August 2009 (EDT)
== Software upgrade (and known issues)==
Now that the traffic from ROTF has died down some, is it time we looked at updating the MediaWiki software we're running?  The latest version out is 1.51. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 17:00, 20 August 2009 (EDT)
===Interwiki linking===
I was trying to link to this ( [http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln%27s_Second_Inaugural_Address http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln%27s_Second_Inaugural_Address] ) article today... and I realized I couldn't do it.
I can interwiki link to WikiSource... but ''not'' to en.wikisource.org.  <nowiki>[[wikipedia:Articlename]]</nowiki>  links properly direct to en.wikipedia.com; since we are an english wiki, it [[Wikipedia:Help:Interwiki_linking|assumes we want to]] link to the English wikipedia... but ''no'' such assumption is made for WikiSource (because you could reasonably be assumed to be linking to a non-English source, once supposes.)
In fact I '''can't''' link to the spanish-language version of the [[Wikipedia: Tacitus| Tacitus]] article either; <nowiki>[[Wikipedia:es:Tácito]]</nowiki> takes me to a non-existant article named [[Wikipedia:es:Tácito|Tácito]] on the ''english'' Wikipedia.
It's not a big deal... the need to link to non-english articles is so rare that we can just substitute an external link.  but it '''does''' means that we can't link properly to Wikisource '''at all''' because their articles ''require'' the language code to be set.... and we simply can't do that.  (We should check back on this problem and see if it fixes itself with the software upgrade.)  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 05:04, 21 August 2009 (EDT)
:That [[Wikipedia:es:Tácito|es:Tácito]] link does, in fact, take me to "http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tácito"!  Once I hit en.wikipedia.org, I get redirected to the Spanish version. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 05:28, 21 August 2009 (EDT)
::I think that's being handled server-side by Wikipedia's server though.  "No article by this name, what could they be searching for?  There's a spanish one..."  The point is that link format ''should'' take you to the correct sever ''without'' the server itself acting as a catchment for sloppy linking.  (And Wikisource doesn't do that, which brings us back full circle.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 05:35, 21 August 2009 (EDT)
:::Sure, ideally, but from looking at the MediaWiki source, it looks like that's how they intend interwiki links to the Spanish version of Wikipedia to be done.  There's nothing stopping us from adding in our own Interwiki prefixes of course!  So even if the update doesn't fix the problem, someone with database access can tweak the Interwiki table. I have noted down to suggest [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:SpecialInterwiki this extension], when we get around to installing extensions. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 06:20, 21 August 2009 (EDT)
===Macron issue===
I've only tested the SQL statement I came up with to fix the macron issue on version 1.12, so ideally that should be done before we upgrade the software. I sent it to McFly a while back, but haven't heard anything more. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 22:30, 25 August 2009 (EDT)
===SearchSuggest===
The [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Search_Suggest SearchSuggest extension] which we're using will be obsolete once we upgrade (it's been replaced by native functionality as of version 1.13 of MediaWiki).  I suspect that it'll probably need to be removed. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 21:32, 9 September 2009 (EDT)
== Article "suites" ==
We've got a couple articles that're broken up into chunks because of length.  (Mostly toy-sections.)  I worry that the broken off bits become "less" somehow.
Enter [[Template:Suite]] which I've roleld out on the [[Optimus Prime (G1)]] article.  It throws a quicknav up in the empty space to the right of the continuity note, and snugs it up against the disambig (if present.)  The template has an "easy mode" and a "hard mode," but neither mode is ''particularly'' hard.  Anyway... I thought this seemed useful.  (Besides, Wikia has a proper nav for this sort of thing, and it irked me that we didn't.  Theirs, however, occupies the spot where our "Factions" icons go, so...)
Thoughts?  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 23:08, 20 August 2009 (EDT)
:I like it. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 01:44, 21 August 2009 (EDT)
::I like the idea! ;-D
::By the way, since we now have [[Template:Suite]], do we still need <nowiki>==Toys== or ==Merchandise==</nowiki> section (which contains nothing) in those page with template:suite? (But section such as "Marvel Comics continuity" should be kept because there are summary in the section.)--'''[[User:TX55|<span style= "color:#00FA9A">TX55</span>]]'''<small><SUP>''[[User talk:TX55|<span style= "color:#0000CD">TALK</span>]]''</SUP></small>02:46, 21 August 2009 (EDT)
:::I think... yes?  If only because people are so used to seeing them... they're level-2 headers.  I don't think it's wise to ''depend'' on people noticing the suite thing at the top of the article.
:::And anyway, we still have a section for Prime in the Marvel comics, neh?  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 03:22, 21 August 2009 (EDT)
::::I agree.  If people miss the suite box and go to to the bottom of the article, looking for Opty's toys, they'll be confused when they don't find the forwarding link.  Definitely keep the toy sections. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 03:43, 21 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::Like the faction symbols, I view this as a more of an enhancement of the existing layout than a replacement.  (Which is why I was so pleased to be able to sneak it into the 'empty space' to the right of the continuity note... no additional disruption to the layout.)
:::::I wonder if this (or a version of it) might proove useful for sub-franchise pages; e.g. Linking the Marvel Comics series page to the Marvel Comcis timeline page.  Replace the [[Revenge of the Fallen (Wii/PS2)|game navigation]] we use.  (It never quite sat right with me, switching to a different franchise navigation just for the games.)
:::::This isn't... ''there'' yet, but it's a step in the right direction I think.  Just like creating the Franchise Navigation ''at all'' was a big step in the right direction in 2007, I think ''this'' (or a solution we evolve once this is in practice and we've got a clearer idea of what we need) could be a step toward that next-level-down interlinking that we're missing.
:::::And frankly, [http://transformers.wikia.com/wiki/Optimus_Prime_%28G1%29 Wikia] had it and we didn't... and that's shameful.  This wasn't even on my radar (at least in this specific application) until I noticed Wikia had it.  (I happen to ''like'' their highly-visible solution better but; '''1)''' We have faction icons in that space.  '''2)''' I think that solution breaks down when you have more than 1 sub-page... and we already have 3.)
:::::Unrelated to all that... the sub-pages are a bit bland to cross-navigate to.  Is there any reason '''not''' to put pictures at the top of them?  (I'm gonna throw one at the top of the [[Optimus Prime (G1)/Marvel Comics continuity|Marvel Comics section]] as an example.)
:::::Even more meta... how do people feel about an [[Optimus Prime (G1)/weapons]] page?  A sort of clearinghouse article to link provide top-level links to Roller, the Combat Deck, his Powermaster partners, our article on the Energon axe and his gun?  (Note: I don't think we have an article on his gun... but we ought.)  As well any anything else that's "form specific" (and thus really doesn't belong in the suite itself) but still prominent enough to have gotten its own article that's really "about" one aspect of Optimus Prime.  ('Weapons' feels better than 'Equipment' for some reason... I don't know.)  I'm just throwing the idea out there. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 04:18, 21 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::::''If'' that counts, we do have [[Ion blaster|Optimus Prime's gun]]. --'''[[User:TX55|<span style= "color:#00FA9A">TX55</span>]]'''<small><SUP>''[[User talk:TX55|<span style= "color:#0000CD">TALK</span>]]''</SUP></small> 08:22, 21 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::Oh yeah, in fact TX55 set up the Wikia solution (it's identical code to the link on [[Christmas]] to the gallery).  Personally I actually find it ''less'' visible than the suite block, partly because of the big three-line sitewide message they have which pushes the page title down.  I completely missed the link to the archives on their Community Portal page, so at first glance it appeared as though someone had deleted all the portal chatter from before this April.
::::::Also, I agree completely about putting pictures at the top of the sub-pages. :) --[[User:Abates|abates]] 04:58, 21 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::::If you were logged in the ad-spam wouldn't be there and it'd display properly in the H1.  (The reason we ''don't'' do the factions this same way is because a sufficiently long page title is expected to wrap politely around the icons... and using CSS positioning would actually cause them to just smash on top of one another.  It's not a ''big'' deal, but our solution is preferable; iPhones might have zooming full-screens, but the expanding e-reader market can be expected to mangle pages.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 05:16, 21 August 2009 (EDT)
::Definitely like it.  And yeah, we should try to have a main pic for sub-pages.  (For Prime's cartoon page, I propose his robot mode at the start of that one transformation sequence that got used in like half the episodes.) -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] 09:41, 21 August 2009 (EDT)
:::When I took a look at this last night, I liked the idea but wasn't overly keen on the plainer look. What Derik has up there now however, that's ridiculously full of win. I approve.
:::I also agree both with main pics on the subpages and the weapon/equipment sub-page for Prime. Perhaps the main pic for the weapon/equipment page could be a screen capture of Prime pointing his gun at the "camera"?  --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 13:25, 21 August 2009 (EDT)
==nofollow for dead links==
I've noticed that some of our external links are to sites that are defunct.  I can understand why we'd want to keep the link on, say [[Transform Your Way]], but we'll get dinged in our Search Engine rankings for each dead link.  Is there any way we can get the <i>rel="nofollow"</i> tag in there for defunct links?--[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] 04:15, 22 August 2009 (EDT)
:As far as I'm aware, <tt>rel="nofollow"</tt> is already enabled on all external links as a matter of course. It's enabled on the link on that page, for instance, if you look in the HTML source.
:Generally it's the opposite that we have to deal with... disabling the nofollow on links we ''want'' to send Google juice to. There was talk of that for TFU.info, the Universe profiles, and a few other sites, but I don't know if it ever got implemented. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 08:48, 22 August 2009 (EDT)
::Ah, good to know. --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] 11:15, 22 August 2009 (EDT)
::It hasn't been implemented - it needs someone with server access to edit the configuration file. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 19:48, 22 August 2009 (EDT)
:::Scout's taken a whack at it, but the software is Mysteriously Not Cooperating.  (I suspect that like similar issues it's just going to wait until we upgrade and see if that fixes it.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 19:53, 22 August 2009 (EDT)
::::Ah, that explains a lot! (I had similar fun trying to set up PHPBBS a while back) --[[User:Abates|abates]] 23:57, 22 August 2009 (EDT)
== Water gun article==
: Is there an article about the squirting guns of transformer toys? there is an article about a water gun used by Ironhide, but it has nothing to do with the gimick of a transformer squirting water. Should we make an article like the rest of the gimmicks?--[[User:Sunjumper|Sunjumper]] 14:32, 24 August 2009 (EDT)
::Yes. How about "water weapon"? - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 14:48, 24 August 2009 (EDT)
:::To make it more easy to look for, could we call it water-gun? or water gun(toy)?I'm not going to start untill i'm sure what to call it.--[[User:Sunjumper|Sunjumper]] 15:05, 24 August 2009 (EDT)
::::In the toy bios it is called a variety of things: aquapower, water power, water weapon... what about following the lead of [[sparking gimmick]] and call it "water gimmick" or "water-squirting gimmick". - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 15:14, 24 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::I'll do my best to make a good article, be gentle on me, i've only made an article once before.--[[User:Sunjumper|Sunjumper]] 15:18, 24 August 2009 (EDT)
== Our new resident vandal..... ==
{{main|Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Vandalism}}
== Wiki Acting Weird ==
Ok, what's up? I've just had an edit conflict with myself. --[[User:-Blackout-|-Blackout-]] 12:28, 25 August 2009 (EDT)
== Googlejuice - Bad News Everyone ==
[http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=transformers+wiki Current Google]: TFWiki third for <font face="monospace">transformers wiki</font>, behind two Wikia results
[http://www2.sandbox.google.com/#hl=en&ei=XmaUSry7C43EMI65_SI&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=transformers+wiki&spell=1&fp=7b823cb19394de08 New Google (a.k.a., "Caffeine")]: TFWiki fifth, behind two Wikia results and two Wikipedia results.
So. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 18:38, 25 August 2009 (EDT)
:Hmm, for me, we've been in "fifth" on google.com since soon after ROTF came out.  I assumed it was just cause a bunch of bloggers had been linking to the Wikipedia article (and Google regards "wiki" as a synonym for "Wikipedia") in which case as the posts they made with the links in moved off their front pages, Wikipedia would move down again. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 20:11, 25 August 2009 (EDT)
::The sandbox link you gave there is showing us third, San.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 20:41, 25 August 2009 (EDT)
::::The sandbox link doesn't actually work for me now, for some reason. And, re: Abates... now I look, google.com does show as fifth, while google.co.uk shows as third. I didn't realise that .com and .co.uk showed different results for a worldwide search... - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 16:19, 26 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::They use a bunch of different databases which all seem to be updated at different rates.  I see the one the sandbox version is using has an updated version of our [[Dirk Manus]] article (which annoyingly seems to have dropped out of the database google.com is using). --[[User:Abates|abates]] 19:09, 26 August 2009 (EDT)
:::Content-wise, there's not a lot we can do.  We were down a lot during the period when the Great Unwashed were blogging about Transformers and didn't know to link to the ''good'' wiki.
:::SEO is server-side, and no one's seen Scout in weeks.  (I'd recommend we pursue the "canonical URL" thing, which search engines are supposed to like.)  I'd be happy to take a whack at it... but I don't have FTP access. :p -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 21:20, 25 August 2009 (EDT)
::::'''Note:''' canonical url's have been added to MediaWiki 1.15, the most recent version released in June. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 21:33, 25 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::Another good reason to upgrade! --[[User:Abates|abates]] 22:17, 25 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::No, another good reason to '''perform a full database backup'''.
::::::Once ''that'' is done and copies saved in at least 3 different locations... ''then'' we can attempt an upgrade. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 01:37, 26 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::::One hopes after the previous incident that that would be taken as read!  I'd reiterate my previous query regarding regular backups, but... --[[User:Abates|abates]] 02:07, 26 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::::Backups are fine, I'm running a test restore to an alternate machine to confirm that the beloved database is okay.  If we're going to run an update, I recommend we bring the wiki back to read-only prior to a nightly backup, do a test restore, make sure said test restore is functional, and then (and only then!) attempt the upgrade on the live server.  That would probably take a few hours, and you're working around our job schedules, which makes it a little hard to find us.  I'd probably drop the macron fix in at that point as well. --[[User:McFly|McFly]] 11:15, 2 September 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::Confirmed.  I just restored yesterday's backup to an alternate machine, and the whole thing came up with a working DB, just as we'd like.  Huzzah! --[[User:McFly|McFly]] 12:19, 2 September 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::Just as a thought... we've now (I think) cleaned out the Wikia spam from all the ''active'' pages, but obviously the page histories are all still crammed with it. When the upgrade comes, could the filter that was originally ran to clean all that out be run again? - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 16:38, 2 September 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::::The filter we originally ran was on the database dump before it was restored, whereas doing an upgrade would be on the live database, so the same technique wouldn't work.  I don't know that there'd be much of a benefit to go about working out a way to scrub the spam from the histories — people don't look at them that often and the search engines don't index them.
:::::::::::Also: ''awesome'' news on the backups, McFly! --[[User:Abates|abates]] 17:03, 2 September 2009 (EDT)
===On upgrading...===
Just checking - whenever we upgrade, the relevant version of MediaWiki allows you to move images in the same way as pages, ja?
I ask because I made a [[User:SanityOrMadness/test2|list of all the Marvel UK cover uploads]] earlier today (NB: #168 and #170 don't appear to have been uploaded in any form, and quite a few others are GIFs, blurry or tiny) for future reference, and there really is no consistently-applied naming schema. ([[:Image:PerchanceToDream.jpg|Some don't]] [[:Image:Desert island risks.jpg|even mention]] [[:Image:BludgeonUK1.jpg|the issue number]] in their names. They ''should'' all be at "Image:MarvelUK-XXX.jpg", which is the most common and consistent with the "Image:MarvelUS-XX.jpg" format for the Marvel US series.) - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 17:13, 6 September 2009 (EDT)
:Yes, newer versions let you move images.  That's one piece of functionality I'll be glad to have! --[[User:Abates|abates]] 17:29, 6 September 2009 (EDT)
::Also, judging by Wikia, images are in a File: namespace instead of the Image: namespace. Hmm. (Incidentally, if you're in need of a laugh, go to the old wikia and click on "Recent blog posts" in the sidebar.  Wow.) --[[User:Abates|abates]] 17:49, 6 September 2009 (EDT)
== So Someone at IDW Reads the Wiki it Seems... ==
Oh, hey, the wiki's back up for me. Er. I guess I'll double-post this for the folks who don't read the Allspark, then:
Someone on the IDW forums pointed this out, and I realized they're right: At the back of All Hail Megatron #14, on the page advertising All Hail Megatron 15, the blue text behind the drawing of Perceptor is taken verbatim from our G1 Perceptor entry. All of it, seriously (I did manage to check before the wiki went poof...) I actually have no idea what to think of that. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 18:41, 26 August 2009 (EDT)
:Is that in-line with [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ the CC-BY-SA licence] (or, I suppose, the GDFL depending on when they locked for print), especially the "Attribution" part of that? [I don't have the issue, since I've never bothered with AHM, so I can't check that for what was said/used] - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 19:52, 26 August 2009 (EDT)
:It means that All Hail Megatron #14 is now Creative Commons, and anyone can make a copy of it or remix it without fear of legal repressions. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 19:58, 26 August 2009 (EDT)
::'''Edit:'''  Oh, it was an ad for the next issue.  Just the ad is creative commons then, no biggie.  We'll see if anything make it into the issue itself.
::Seriously, this is ''exactly'' why I was suggesting we adopt [[Transformers_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal/Relicensing#Suggested_direction|a separate license]] with terms for comercial productions that already have the TF license from Hasbro/Takara, to prevent ''exactly'' that sort of legal ambiguity. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 19:58, 26 August 2009 (EDT)
:::I agree we should have a license that better reflects our legal rights and not-rights... it's just the question of how to legally switch to it without the impossible task of getting permission from every wiki contributor that's the problem. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 22:55, 26 August 2009 (EDT)
::::I talked about this (how to rollout a second Hasbro-friendly license) a little... somewhere in that long-winded thing I wrote.
::::I've been poking at it for a couple hours... and I think that we'd be ''best'' off  invoking the principle of a "customary freehold", an unwritten legal arrangement that's seldom seen anymore (because since the 19th century all contracts have been written down) but which is still recognized to be valid.
::::That would cast us as <small>(try to keep a straight face)</small> untaxed tenant farmers on Hasbro's land.  We keep the result of our labor, but our work also benefits Hasbro in that it cultivates their land (promotes their brand.)  No contracts were signed, but our mucking about on/with Hasbro's property does not make us outlaws... but some mixture of neighbor, a guest and serf.  We incur obligation to our host, and Hasbro incurs obligation to its fans... both of which can be said to be "paid down" by characterizing the kind of fractional diffusion/transmission of intellectual property that takes place between both parties is a 'gift.'  (This is distinct from turning a blind eye and pretending it does not exist, because it means that Hasbro actually ''has'' a right to use a small non-specified portion of our labors... we gifted it to them!)
::::''Put more simply'', it makes fans [[Wikipedia:pilot fish|pilot fish]] existing in a mutually beneficial symbiosis with a larger corporate entity.
::::The reason I favor '''this''' solution is because
::::* That's not a license.  It's an underlying legal principle that was ''always'' in effect.  (In other words, it applies to all past edits.)
::::* I think this actually reflects what fans believe they are doing then they contribute to the wiki, as well as our general belief that we've incurred ''some'' (though not overwhelming) moral obligation to protect our "Landlord"'s interests.
::::* The actual second license '''itself''' would grant limited usage rights in a more explicit manner for all edits made past 11-01-2009 (or whatever), then fall back on customary freehold rights for the remainder... and only when ''that'' is exhausted does Fair use come into play.  In short- "we give them explicit permission to use this portion, they had implicit permission to use a portion of the remainder, and they have a legal right to use another portion of ''that'' remainder afterward without our permission."  3 levels of diminishing legal protection that act as "catchment" for Hasbro's use of our content.  They would have to '''heroically''' abuse our content-- wholesale reprinting-- to bust all 3.
::::That's pretty much the best of all possible worlds... in that it actually has some ''retroactive'' application to old content, because rather than releasing the content under this principle it recognizes that this principle had always existed, just like Fair Use always exists. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 00:08, 27 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::I voted for that. At least I voted as close to that as possible without knowing a whole lot about the ins-and-outs of licenses and such. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 00:46, 27 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::It doesn't work that way... those come INTO the cover.  They only get infected if they go OUT of it again.  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 02:16, 4 September 2009 (EDT)
===(Edit break)===
Actually, this makes me happy. You know why? Two reasons:
#The text is very definitely from ''our'' version of the article, not Wikia's. There are passages in that promo that we wrote after the split with Wikia.
#The text includes one of our nutball captions: "Like every other tough-guy group walk in the movies..."
This tickles me pink, really.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 22:09, 26 August 2009 (EDT)
:That's awesome, especially the (no doubt unintentional) use of the caption. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 22:50, 26 August 2009 (EDT)
::True, I am glad to know that the IDW folks don't look at Wikia... Does this merit a mention on the issue's page itself, with a link to the current Percy revision? (And maybe a nice, clear scan of the advertisement?) --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 22:53, 26 August 2009 (EDT)
:::I think it only means the colorist of the graphic reads our Wiki.  I believe it's one of the covers of AHM #15, not merely an ad.  --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 22:59, 26 August 2009 (EDT)
::::[[:Image:AllHailMegatron15 CoverA.jpg|Yep]]. It's going to be Cover A.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 23:10, 26 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::Ah! In that case, I think [[Joana Lafuente]] is the colorist, if I'm remembering my IDW forum posts correctly. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 23:18, 26 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::Not surprising she'd throw a little love our way, considering. Personally, that's all I take this as.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 23:19, 26 August 2009 (EDT)
:If Hasbro contacts us RE: that cover, can we offer to settle a nickel? --[[User:FortMax|FortMax]] 23:13, 26 August 2009 (EDT)
::No actually, under CC-BY-SA3, no one person or body has the ability to act as legal proxy for all contribuitors.  IDW would need to contact every single person who's ever edited the Perceptor article and get them ''all'' to sign off on it.  (I'm not kidding, that's actually what the code mandates.)  If they fail to do this, the result ''automatically'' becomes CC-BY-SA3.
::[http://deriksmith.livejournal.com/45915.html ...or we could do this.]  (I've been researching you see.)  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 20:56, 27 August 2009 (EDT)
:::Wait, if AHM14 came out on August the 19th, surely they went to print ''before'' we switched licences? Marvel print in North America, and they still go to print 19 or 20 days before an issue comes out. IDW print further afield (in South Korea, wasn't it?), and even AHM15 may well have gone to print before Aug 1. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 19:57, 1 September 2009 (EDT)
:::[Oh, and while you're saying the "infection" is small, and limited to the ad/cover... the "infected" cover would/will include the Transformers and IDW logos...] - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 20:00, 1 September 2009 (EDT)
===A new argument===
Okay, this is a ''little'' specious, but I'm going to throw this out and see what others think...
* Preview art is often pending approval, (particularly covers) and may receive changes prior to the actual hard-copy publication.
* It would be most accurate to say that the work is first licensed (or at least re-licensed) at the time of hard-copy publication.
* The AHM#15 ad then, would be a work unto itself... complete with ad dress.
* The AHM #15 ''cover'', which will remove this ad dress (and possibly re-crop or re-present the base illustration) before adding ''cover dress'' is a new work... ''not'' derived from the AHM#15 ad.  (the ad dress was not an earlier state from which the actual cover derived-- both the ad and the cover are branches of a dress-less illustration.)
* As such, at the time of AHM#15's publication, that cover will be licensed under whatever terms we have available... and ''not'' as a derivation of the AHM#15 ad.
I'm a bit wary of this... because it seems to claim that the online previews of the cover with no dress does ''not'' count as a licensed work.  Yet such previews often are listed as 'subject to change' and thus are demonstrably not a final product.  (In the case of Marvel titles, they can have cover elements completely altered when they realize their penciler traced copyrighted images.)  Finally, and perhaps most lamely... the text on the preview isn't legible.
(Uh... FWIW the ad itself appears to be a slight crop-down, and perhaps had its colors re-graded compared to the original preview.)
Basically this hinges on the online preview not having licensed the content from us... defining it as 'an internal work-document' whose use of our content was ''not'' yet licensed under CC-BY-SA... the licensing to take place after final approvals at the time of hardcopy publication. 
(This isn't entirely crazy, fair use allows you to make a cull copy of a movie for your personal use, but you'd have to clear the rights to use more than snippets for a comercial product.  Graphic designers routinely do mockups of layouts without clearing the fonts or stock photography used... only doing so after the final version is approoved.  Who are we to say at what point in the process the licensing occoured?  We know only that it must have happened before the end.)
Thoughts?  And does anyone know the actual publication date of AHM #15?  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 10:15, 31 August 2009 (EDT)
:Nothing more specific than "September" for the moment. With any luck IDW's newsletter will come out tomorrow so my placeholder can finally get properly sorted. (It used to be that Tipton would have an up-to-date schedule on his blog sidebar, but he seems to have stopped regularly updating it.) --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 20:02, 31 August 2009 (EDT)
::Looks like it's coming out on the 16th. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 18:23, 1 September 2009 (EDT)
:::What a lovely due-date we have!  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 18:30, 1 September 2009 (EDT)
===Preview's out===
Preview, cover text intact: http://www.bzzurkk.com/2009/09/transformers-all-hail-megatron-15-preview/ - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 17:06, 13 September 2009 (EDT)
:Lovely.  I have drafted some [http://deriksmith.livejournal.com/47225.html notes on a possible license.]  Please feel free to review and respond.
:If no fundamental problems arise, I will probably beat my head against a wall tomorrow to flatten this into an actual $%^&* license text (with a forward-compatibility clause in case we discover a problem later) and propose it to the wiki for formal consideration.
:Whether or not anybody but me thinks it's a good idea... remains to be seen. - [[User:Derik|Derik]] 16:45, 14 September 2009 (EDT)
== Blinking redirects gone from Show Preview? ==
Was wondering where the triple-underlines and yellow blinking went whenever I hit "Show Preview". I might've missed the memo regarding that. --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] 13:19, 27 August 2009 (EDT)
:You're right, it's not working for me either. I want that back, it was incredibly useful! :( --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 17:56, 27 August 2009 (EDT)
::Looks like Derik made a typo when commenting out a bit of code in the stylesheet - there's a stray s after the comment. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 18:27, 27 August 2009 (EDT)
:::Oops.  I shall fix. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 20:51, 27 August 2009 (EDT)
::::Shouldn't stuff like that be in [[MediaWiki:Common.css]] anyway? Once it's tested and working, etc. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 22:36, 27 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::In theory, but some people hate the blinking so I've held its status as "in development" until people either get used to it or a superior solution emerges.  For example, Rosicrucian specifically asked me how to override the blinking a few weeks ago, so I think he's either messing about with different effects or at least ''intends'' to do so.  Given that he's done a good chunk of our designwork (I do a lot of the template stuff, but he developed monacobook) there's a reasonable chance he's could come back with a solution everyone likes better, so holding the code as 'in development' for awhile longer is merely prudent.
:::::(If I had admin access I might feel different, but I don't, so going back to try to tweak code once it's in Common.css because you later realize it needs changing is a ''major'' hassle.  So I try not to migrate these styles until they seem final and there's nothing on the horizon that seems likely to change 'em.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 23:00, 27 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::Ah. Maybe just yellow highlight and triple-underline them without the blinking? --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] 23:41, 27 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::::I kinda like the animation as it catches the eye, though Firefox seems to have problems figuring out when you click on a blinking link.  I'm thinking maybe if the text stays put and instead it has an animated background, which could be a small animated gif that pulses or something. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 23:54, 27 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::::Oh, so THAT'S what that was. I was getting incredibly annoyed by that. --[[User:-Blackout-|-Blackout-]] 03:39, 28 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::It's ''supposed'' to be annoying, so you'll be motivated to change the redirect to the proper link to make it go away. (I tried telling that to Rosicrucian when he complained about the blinking, but I don't think I explained it very well...) --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 19:31, 28 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::Oh, why do they have to be back?! --[[User:-Blackout-|-Blackout-]] 09:25, 9 September 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::::Maybe because they're incredibly useful? -[[User:Mazenoise|Mazenoise]] 09:29, 9 September 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::::Where did I put the code I gave Rosicrucian... ah, '''here it is'''.  If you truly hate the blinking, add the following to [[Special:Mypage/monacobook.css|your style page]]:
<pre>#wikiPreview a.mw-redirect{
text-decoration: underline;
}</pre>
::::::::::::That will turn blink off.  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 14:00, 15 September 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::::::DERIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIK!!!!!
:::::::::::::That doesn't work. --[[User:-Blackout-|-Blackout-]] 15:21, 15 September 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::::::Does so.  Shift-refresh to clear your cache.  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 17:11, 15 September 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::I did that, and it still doesn't work. --[[User:-Blackout-|-Blackout-]] 01:40, 16 September 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::Curious.  You don't happen to be using Monobook as your defauly style instead of Monacobook, do you... ? -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 03:57, 16 September 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::::Nope. --[[User:-Blackout-|-Blackout-]] 07:49, 16 September 2009 (EDT)
== GoBox Problem ==
Is there something wrong with the GoBoxes? Whenever I go to [[Talk:Bulkhead syndrome]], I get a GoBox that leads to [[Max|this page]]. --[[User:-Blackout-|-Blackout-]] 09:20, 2 September 2009 (EDT)
:Go-boxes for a given page will sometimes cache for short periods of time.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 11:09, 2 September 2009 (EDT)
==Can the nav-template images be variables?==
For example:  The [[:Template:Nav-henkei|''Henkei! Henkei!'' nav-template]] uses the logo from the toy packaging, since that applies to the majority of the pages the template is on.  However, the [[Henkei! Henkei! (Comic Bun Bun)|Comic Bun Bun ''Henkei!'' material]]
uses a completely different logo design, and it would be nice to be able to substitute it for just that page.  This is one of several times I've wanted to be able to do that, and maybe there's a simple way to designate the image as a replaceable variable, but my markup-fu is weak.  Any help is appreciated. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 20:35, 6 September 2009 (EDT)
:<s>The answer seems to be "no"... for some reason, even with a default set in the parameter, the imagemap code refuses to parse the parameter's info.</s>
:<s>You could always just post the entire code of the navigation template manually on that one page with the logo code swapped...</s> --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 21:22, 6 September 2009 (EDT)
:NM, I figured it out. You should be able to do this now:
:<nowiki>{{nav-henkei|logo=(filename)|size=(number)(unit)}}</nowiki>
:It's set up so that if the parameters aren't given, it'll just display the default, so you don't need to change the pages that do use the typical logo. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 21:36, 6 September 2009 (EDT)
::Awesooooooooome, thank you. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 22:32, 6 September 2009 (EDT)
:::No problem. :) Let me know if you need any of the other navs altered, although you should be able to just copy and paste the code and change the defaults... (actually, with my [[User:Jeysie/FranchiseNavs|idea for a code revamp]], I wonder if it might be possible to just have one nav template with all variables...) --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 23:22, 6 September 2009 (EDT)
::::Hmm, I didn't know you were playing around with franchise-nav revisions.  I actually have a grand proposal cooking up in my head for a full breadcrumb-trail nav revamp that would be applicable to basically any non-character/item/place article.  The idea being that if you're at, say, an article about a comic issue, there would be a nav in the corner with links to the series, franchise, and continuity family going up in a column.  And if you're at a series-article, you would be one step up in that chain, and the nav would have links to all the other series in that franchise (presented in the current style), as well as the vertically-arranged "title" links to the franchise and continuity family.  Then if you're at a franchise, you get links to the other franchises in that continuity family, plus the continuity family itself.  And, finally, the continuity-family articles themselves would have a nav with links to the other families.  It would be a change in functionality to the effect that the cluster of little links would always be lateral, and digging down into more specific topics would require links within the articles themselves.  Currently that's the case with most articles, the exception being franchises.  But I think it would be incredibly awesome to have that kind of breadcrumb-trail so a reader always knows where he or she is in the multiverse at large.  Plus it would help clarify how the hierarchy of families and franchises and series and so on actually works in specific cases, since that's often been a source of confusion and argument.
::::But I figure I should cobble together a working sample of some sort before I formally present the idea, and I think I might need some more markup-fu before that's even possible.  Or I could make a facsimile in Flash or something...  Anyway, at the very least, I think having the ability to swap out the logo image is actually a step towards making this idea happen.  So thanks again!
::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 00:27, 7 September 2009 (EDT)
:::::Well, my current idea was mainly just trying to simplify the existing coding a little, as well as adding some prev/next links to the continuity family section. I think the big problem with breadcrumb links is that people would have to put them in by hand, which would make filling in comic stories even more work than it already is. The "continuity family" section of the comicnav template already tends to be pretty inconsistent sometimes depending on how the person creating the page chooses to link it. (In other words, it's a nice idea, but it'd be too contingent on people filling it in correctly.) --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 00:41, 7 September 2009 (EDT)
:::::::The episode nav template uses standard strings to identify continuities (like "g1toon") and then uses look-up tables to find the proper series page link for this, the proper "human-readable" for that link and even look up how many episodes there are in the series, and create automatic prev/next links as long as you give it an episode number.
:::::::The reason we use strings instead of pagenames is '''1)''' they're shorter, simpler, cleaner, more standardized... '''2)''' it means that if the page moves (or we change our mind on the naming convention) we only have to change it in ''one place'' in the lookup tables, and the link changes on hundreds of pages.
:::::::What I'm saying is... you DON'T need to force users to fill in series/franchise/family.  ...just fill in the SERIES.  Let the template fill in the rest!  (And let you manually override the lookup if you explicitly provide variables, for maximum flexability.)
:::::::But that's not a system you can throw together by trial and error; it needs proper architecture planning or it'll be a godawful mess.
:::::::I guess what I'm saying is... if we really want to rationalize and standardize the major templates on the wiki... we need a serious meta-talk about what that means, in the broadest possible scope. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 01:01, 7 September 2009 (EDT)
::::::::Well, the problem is... I agree it'd be pretty easy to auto-breadcrumb the TV series. But when you start getting into things like the comics and text stories, you start running into many different miniseries and individual issues, all of which fit into different continuities. I think the continuity family is already enough info for those, provided we make sure they all point to the right ones. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 01:48, 7 September 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::That's not exactly a 'problem' as it's conventionally thought of.  You could set up auto-fill-ins for the 6 most commons comics-- which would cover 70-80% of everything, but let manual values be set for the rest (or not set) to the level of detail you desire.  No solution has to be 100% you know. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 03:05, 7 September 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::No, but for stuff like the Marvel Comics it would take just as long to copy and paste in manual info as it would to paste in the new code, after all. So it's the new pages where people would have one more thing to add in that you'd really need to worry about, if it's part of that other 20%. Whereas I agree that new TV series episodes would get to have the benefit of auto-ness.
::::::::::I guess it just seems like a lot of work for little benefit, seeing as how the continuity part of the nav pretty much covers all the context necessary. Not that I don't think it's possible the ep/comicnav could use some overhaul (though what exactly I don't know; they both seem pretty complete to me), just that I don't think breadcrumbs would be an effective expenditure of time. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 03:43, 7 September 2009 (EDT)
::::::::I'm pretty much in agreement with that last sentiment, which is one of the reasons why I'm not technically proposing my idea yet.  It needs a more concrete starting point (like a mock-up design) from which all the discussion and probably argument can branch.  I have my own notions about how it could be set up in a way that wouldn't involve as much work or personal discretion as Jeysie suggests, but... well, now's not the time.  Maybe later. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 01:12, 7 September 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::So what needs revision?  The episode templates-- fine.  And the comic issues.  And the franchise navigation.  And a standard breadcrumbing system...  but what else? -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 01:17, 7 September 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::I've noticed on the Marvel wiki that the "writer"/"artist" text in their issue infoboxes links to [[:Category: Writers]].  I'd liek us ot consider adding this.  (Also, there's something about the size or spacing of their infoboxes I just ''like''... I think we might want to take a look at 'em when we get around to recoding.)
::::::Derik points out that in such a scenario, the breakcrumb need not be built into (for example) the episode infobox template.  The more elegant solutions is something like:
<pre><nowiki> {{episode
  |breadcrumb= {{breadcrumb
                |continuity_family=[[Unicron Trilogy]]
                |franchise=[[Armada (franchise)|]]
                |series=[[Armada (cartoon)|cartoon]]
              }}
}}</nowiki></pre>
::::::...where you'd be pass the whole breadcrumb template as a parameter to another template.  That way if the breadcrumb also has to show up in other templates... there's a standard code, standard styling, etc.  Cleaner simpler code, easier to maintain, more universal, easier to work with, less percussive maintenence, etc.
::::::That's not a solution to everything though, because we've got two prev/next/series navs for comics, and some of the Marvel issues could use ''four'' or more.  Stacking 4 of those things is retarded, and pointless.  We need a more rational means of addressing republished stuff.  I went to look up when a certain Marvel UK issue was published the other day and we '''didn't have the information'''.  ...because it was published in the US first, and our template only has one "pub date" field. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 00:52, 7 September 2009 (EDT)
::Sankyuu! Henkei needs a bit more love. :D --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] 22:59, 6 September 2009 (EDT)
===Jeysie's infobox===
<div style="border:solid 2px #def;float:right;margin:0 1em 1em 1em;text-align:center;width:300px;">
<p style="background:#def;margin:0;padding:.2em .5em 0;text-align:center;">'''Prisoner of War!'''</p>
<div style="margin:1em .25em .5em .25em;">[[Image:MarvelUS-03.jpg|frameless|230px]]<br/>Is he strong? Listen, [[Bud]], he made Megatron go thud.</div>
{|cellspacing="0" style="margin:.5em 0;text-align:left;width:100%;"
|-
!colspan="2" style="background:#def;margin:0;padding:.5em 0;text-align:center;"|[[Marvel Comics]]
|-
!style="padding:.5em .5em .2em .5em;"|Cover date
|style="padding:.5em .5em .2em .5em;text-align:right;"|January 1985
|-
!style="padding:.2em .5em .5em .5em;"|Street date
|style="padding:.2em .5em .5em .5em;text-align:right;"|[[October 2]], 1984
|-
|colspan="2" style="text-align:center;"|[[Marvel Comics continuity]]
|}
{|style="background:#def;padding:.5em 0;width:100%;"
|-
!style="border:outset 3px #9cf;font-size:125%;padding:0 .2em;"|[[Power Play!|&laquo;]]
![[The Transformers (Marvel comic)|''The Transformers'' (US)]] #3
!style="border:outset 3px #9cf;font-size:125%;padding:0 .2em;"|[[The Last Stand|&raquo;]]
|-
!style="border:outset 3px #9cf;font-size:125%;padding:0 .2em;"|[[Power Play!|&laquo;]]
![[The Transformers (Marvel comic)#Marvel UK|''The Transformers'' (US)]] #5–6
!style="border:outset 3px #9cf;font-size:125%;padding:0 .2em;"|[[The Last Stand|&raquo;]]
|}
{|style="padding:.5em;text-align:right;width:100%;"
|-
!style="text-align:left;"|Writer
|[[Jim Salicrup]]
|-
!style="text-align:left;"|Penciler
|[[Frank Springer]]
|-
!style="text-align:left;"|Inker
|[[Kim DeMulder]], [[Jim Esposito]]
|-
!style="text-align:left;"|Colorist
|[[Nelson Yomtov]]
|-
!style="text-align:left;"|Letterers
|[[Janice Chiang]] & Others
|-
!style="text-align:left;"|Editor
|[[Bob Budiansky]]
|}
</div>
I remember doing this rough tweak idea based on Derik's comment that he liked the Marvel wiki's infobox.
Not very ''much'' of a tweak, admittedly, as I actually like our current setup for the most part. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 21:46, 17 September 2009 (EDT)
:Okay, some things:
:#{{tl|comicstory}} is used for a LOT more than, well, comic stories, to the point that the template name is bad. But unless you want to go and find/change all of those uses (and they're pretty diverse, I don't think you could bot them), it's pretty much impossible to change the broad layout of the template.
:#Moving the back/forward navigation from the top (where it's easily accessible) to a point where it would be ''below the fold'' on netbooks, e-readers and less up to date PCs? Are you seriously suggesting that?!
:Seriously, I don't "get" the ideas behind the layout here at all. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 22:00, 17 September 2009 (EDT)
::They all use pretty much the same setup, actually, if you look at them. I can't think of any usage on text stories and books that is seriously different offhand... they have different credit/info types, yes, but they go visually in the same places. I would probably put things like page count and ISBN in the "publisher" box.<br/><br/>
::And like I said, I was emulating the Marvel wiki infobox, which actually has the navigation at the ''bottom''. But essentially... I wanted to get the title up top, and make a "publisher" section, and a "credits" section... and the navigation made a good visual divider between the last two sections. I agree it's kind of weird, though... I could see moving it back up to the top under the title and just having a thick border in its place between the bottom two sections.
::Like I said, it's pretty minor stuff... I think our infobox is just about perfect as-is, really. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 22:10, 17 September 2009 (EDT)
:::It's not just stories. The [[Hasbro Q&A]] pages use it. The Collectors' Club Magazine pages use it, along with other non-story content from magazines, etc. What's the "title" in those instances?
:::Moreover, why move the title to the top at all? The title is already written in big letters at the top of the page on a single-story page, or at the top of the section on multi-story pages. Below the cover is a good place for it.
:::And the cover date & street date are hanging in no-man's land here, with no association with any relevant information - it looks like ''Marvel Comics'' had a street date of Oct 2, 1984.- [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 22:37, 17 September 2009 (EDT)
::::We'd leave the title off. You know, just like we do for miniseries ''already''? Sheesh, I love it when people complain about something "new" without realizing the wiki already does it.</sarcasm>
::::That said, if we move the navigation back to the top, we could move the title back under the picture again. I guess it just seems to me like it's the "first" bit of info about a book, and you could use your comment as an argument towards leaving out the title bit entirely anyway.
::::I like my publisher idea, though... it separates the meta-info about the book from the credits. And the publisher's name makes the most logical sense to use in a section heading. Like you said, the title's at the top, so I have a hard time thinking anyone's going to think the street date has to do with the publisher's name instead of the issue the article's about. I like to assume basic intelligence on the part of the reader. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 06:53, 18 September 2009 (EDT)
:::Our existing comicstory template is already deficient in presenting multi-part stories: I went to look up when [[Target: 2006]] was published... and discovered it had no date.  And why ''should'' it?  The article spans several issues, with no single correct date to give!
:::(I happen to think presenting the UK stories in 1 article like this is stupid... but I lost that fight a long time ago, so the template might as well address it well.) -23:44, 17 September 2009 (EDT)
::::Er. What's wrong with just listing all the dates in the date section, or a range of dates? We already do that for Man of Iron, IIRC. I don't see what the big deal is there. It's a date field... no reason it can't have more than one date in it.
::::The only accommodation I might make is adding extra "story 2" credits to make credits for multiple stories a bit tidier, but that's less a major change and more just a tweak. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 06:53, 18 September 2009 (EDT)
====Counter-proposal====
{{:User:SanityOrMadness/infobox}}
Keeps the basic layout of the current {{tl|comicstory}} (including keeping the '''issue numbers''' rather than the title at the top, which I consider key), but separates the meta-info from the story info (which is headed by the title, as it should be. I would prefer to use separate infoboxen for separate stories on the same page, but you could have separate subsections for separate stories, each headed by the title, if it was thought desirable). - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 08:55, 18 September 2009 (EDT)
:I definitely agree with San here that the navigation info ''needs'' to be at the top. It's just counter-intuitive otherwise.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 12:15, 18 September 2009 (EDT)
::I like the idea of separate credit sections in the same infobox for separate stories in a single issue, with the titles of each story as the header; I was going to suggest that myself. We could always do a "if/then" clause so the extra section only shows up if one of the pertinent parameters is used. (I think stacking entire infoboxes might get a bit too cluttered, plus it's nice to see a whole issue's overview right at the top, but I'm willing to see a mockup if someone thinks that might work better.)
::I find myself wondering if continuity should be in the navigation somehow, as then we could potentially tag it as a separate prev/next series if need be. I know that I was reading the Axiom Nexus text stories, for instance, and there seems to be a lack of a good way to show how some stories relate to each other in terms of reading order when the actual publication order in the franchise it's released under has stuff in between. (The Shattered Glass stories at least had the ready excuse of being stuck under that franchise for the navigation...) --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 18:01, 18 September 2009 (EDT)
:::::''I like the idea of separate credit sections in the same infobox for separate stories in a single issue, with the titles of each story as the header; I was going to suggest that myself.''
::::Betcha weren't :p [Seriously, with the title up top out of the way, you couldn't do anything of the sort]
::::Anyhoo, the main reason I'm a bit reluctant to put multiple stories together in such a fashion is that it would seem to divorce the latter stories from the infobox with their credits. If they end up so close together that the infoboxen actually '''stack''' and push the info ''away'' from the story in question, put them together in one infobox by all means. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 20:39, 18 September 2009 (EDT)
:::::Betcha I was. Because hey, you could put the title of the issue at the top (or not, if the issue doesn't actually have a title), and the title of the individual stories in the credit sections. It's funny how that works. :D
:::::And, like I said, if someone can do a mockup of dual infoboxes that doesn't look silly, I could buy it. As it is, I just think it'd be weird basically having two separate pages on one page. I like the idea of the infobox itself being devoted to the comic issue as a whole. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 21:01, 18 September 2009 (EDT)
:::I am uncomfortable with the "dual navigation" system simply because... some of these stories have now been published 3 or '''4''' times.  No previous/next for them?  They don't get credits or publication dates?  What if I '''want''' to know when IDW published an issue of "Prey," how many parts of that story they published (IDW doubled up content from 2 UK issues) or anything else important?
:::We're just tossing aside republishing info because our template doesn't support it.  Same problem with the dates being left off multi-part stories... if it's nto clear how to add the information, the information becomes lost. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 19:40, 18 September 2009 (EDT)
::::Isn't the point of the '"dual-navigation" system' to record '''contemporaneous''' republication? [Marvel US in Marvel UK/Marvel G2 in Fleetway G2/IDW Beast Wars & AHM in Titan TF (...actually we don't currently do that last set, although we should)/etc]. That is, we wouldn't record an IDW "Best of the UK" as such even if it was the first such reprinting, because it was twenty years later?
::::If you try to fit ''four'' sets of data in one poor infobox, it would become unmanageably and unreadably large. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 20:39, 18 September 2009 (EDT)
{{--}}
===CSS rationalization===
While discussing rewriting our HTML... we should also probably discuss CSS rationalization.
Right now our code has absolutely no regard for what the page looks like printed.  (Those messageboxes at the top of pages probably don't need to be there when printed.)  Do we want our links to have addresses when printed?  For example, I believe CSS could make [[Optimus Prime (G1)|this link]] print like <u>this link</u> ("Optimue Prime (G1)") or like <u>this link</u> ( http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Optimus_Prime_(G1) ) or like <u>this link</u> ( tfwiki.net/wiki/Optimus_Prime_(G1) ), any of which would be 'friendlier' for printed-out versions.
Of course, if this was applied to excessively [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PotHole PotHole'd] articles, the text it might become almost unreadable.  Perhaps smaller or faded text would make <u>tooting my own horn</u> <span style="font-size:65%;
color:#666;">User:Derik</span> less obtrusive when printed.  Regardless what's decided for article text, I strongly believe that ''storylinks'' should have the disambig visible when printing.  <span style="font-size:10px;background-color:#ececec;border-width: 0 1px 0 1px;border-style:solid;padding: 0 5px 0 5px;border-color:#cccccc;color:#666;" class="tt1_nowrap">King of the Hill (Armada episode)</span>
Printing, I grant you, is a fairly minor concern.  But what about syndication?  A few people are beginning to [http://www.botchthecrab.com/archive/history.asp dynamically syndicate] our content.  Botch went to some trouble to remove our messageboxes and various other elements-- he just wanted the guts of the article.  If we'd attached standard classes to templates (ones that have '''no CSS''' associated with them as far as TFWiki is concerned) he could have just syndicated the page as-is and hidden those elements with a few lines of CSS!  (If nothing else, the storylinks need a class marking them... that seems like something that many would like to hide.)
Live page syndication is clumsy.  (And I need to yell at Botch, because IIRC he's doing his in a terrible way, from our server's perspective.)  But if we ''encourage'' it, it's another tool in our promotional quiver!  (There was a PHP script I was working on the other month that actually has some ''fairly good'' TFWiki-specific syndication.  If that was polished and made easy to use, it could have some legs.)
Soto-voice snark aside-- we really need classed like ''.noPrint'' and ''.printOnly.''  And when we redo our episode/issue infoboxes... the tables should be tested to they print nicely, '''and''' we should publish the CSS people can use to turn various 'bits off.  (Or a 'general guide to site CSS', if only for our OWN use.)
How about this...?  We've been moving a LOT of our code out of HTML and into CSS.  One of the effects of this is that simply syndicating [http://tfwiki.net/w2/index.php?title=Package_art&action=render the "rendered" page]... a lot of the HTML layouts are gobbeltygook.  Should we have a consideration for syndicators who don't include our CSS file?  Maybe templates we know are unlikely to be wanted can be flagged with a ''.noSyndicate'' class, making it easy to hide them?  Or we should have a Syndicate.css file that includes the bare-minimum CSS code for templates to lay out right?  Should ''some'' templates (<nowiki>{{quote}}</nowiki>, for instance) be rewritten so that they will render in a readable (if not ideal) fashion even if no css is included?  Is there a "scale" these questions all fall on... a sort of "how important is this element to the content of the page?" spectum, where at the low end we don't care and tell people to hide it, at the middle we provide identifying tags so they can be hidden, or a truncated CSS file so they render nice, and at the high end we write the HTML so the element will always be readable even without CSS to make it pretty?  (That last one means code that's less contextual.  Where do our priorities lie?)
These are philosophical issues.  None are especially high priority, but the "cost" of addressing them is relatively tiny, so if we're doing some thorough redesigning... it'd be a good idea.
Some elements we have (like main pages) sometimes get quite "big" (laid out in a fashion that accepts a minimum of 500+ pixels wide.)  Is it worth adding a ''.bigElement'' class or a ''.mobile'' class so that those elements can have code written in a mobile device CSS file that reduces their size?  Is this even a concern for new mobile devices, which scale easily?  How to Kindles handle them?  Do e-readers support javascript?  What about tablets and wireless internet devices?


More and more, content on the internet is going to be viewed by something other than what we normally think of as a "web browser," and because web-''developers'' spend all their time in web browsers they often neglect these outletsWe do not have to bend over backward to accommodate these technologies... if problems do arise, they will probably be the 90/10 sort; 90% of the solution/benefit can be accomplished with just 10% of the effort.<br/>'''Example:''' When [http://tformers.com a certain news site] rolled out their home page redesign several years ago, it mis-rendered on some versions of Safari-- pushing the story content below the left navigation bar.  In short... the page appeared '''blank'''.  This problem remained unfixed for almost a year-- it was caused by the nav rendering just ''one'' pixel too wide, pushing a floated layout downThis remained unfixed for almost a year.  I'm sure that this bug only affected maybe 1% of site visitorsBut after a year of blank pages... that 1% also probably '''stopped visiting'''.  1% over the course of a year is a ''lot'' of lost pageviews, it's like having your site be down for 3 days.
== Binder of Revelation Illustration Credits ==
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 nowI got in touch with the art director of the Binder of Revelation and have a fairly complete list of credits for who did what illustration. Since this isn't actually a published work, how do we go about giving proper illustration credits?  Do we even credit anyone?  Considering the document itself has no credits, I feel like it's worthwhile that the artists get recognized, even if we aren't putting any images up ourselves.  [[User:MCRG|MCRG]] ([[User talk:MCRG|talk]]) 21:37, 25 November 2025 (EST)
:I 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)
::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)
:::It's a pretty wide spread, surprisinglyA 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)
::::All known credits addedOn 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)


Anyway... that's my rant. There's no solutions there... just ideas/concerns/meta.
== What are we calling the new "Core" Transformers stuff? ==


If other people are interested in discussing this sort of thing... may I suggest we create a dumping ground at [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Quantum Cycle Upgrade]] where we can gather thoughts/issues about long-term infrastructure upgrades?  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 20:35, 8 September 2009 (EDT)
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)


:Picking up on just one thing for now:
:I was JUST adding a section here and rather than rewriting...<br>
::''Those messageboxes at the top of pages probably don't need to be there when printed''
: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)
:Thing about that is that they DO contain information you might want when printed that isn't contained elsewhere on a page (the writer of a story, for instance).
::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 could certainly see a certain degree of stripping down the messageboxen for printing as a good idea (take a look at http://tfwiki.net/w2/index.php?title=End_of_the_Road!_(US)&printable=yes - it's not even just the {{tl|comicstory}} [which has become a bad name for that template as its' uses have multiplied...] box - the {{tl|featuredcharacters}} box further down could do with being stripped for print. And I'm not sure the {{tl|disambig2}} needs to be visible at all.), but I'm not sure about hiding them by default. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 22:15, 8 September 2009 (EDT)
::I agree about stripping those kinds of things down... but when I said "messageboxes" I meant things like "picsneeded"; those have an ''enormous'' footprint, and they print. Their ''entire purpose'' is to alert editors of page deficiencies.... but people reading print-outs aren't editing those the pages, it's pointless. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 22:32, 8 September 2009 (EDT)
:::Ah. I wasn't thinking of those, just {{tl|comicstory}} and {{tl|episode}}. Yeah, removing {{tl|picsneeded}} and its ilk would make sense. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 10:20, 9 September 2009 (EDT)


== "(Marvel Comics)" or "(Marvel comic)" ==
== Size of the page again ==


*[[The Transformers (Marvel comic)]] (Jackpot moved it in June on the basis of "Consistency with how we treat other parenthetical comic-company names, such as "(Dreamwave comic)" instead of "(Dreamwave Productions)")
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)
*[[Generation 2 (Marvel Comics)]] (Interrobang ''just got the (Marvel comic) redirect deleted'' on one of his rampages)
*[[Transformers Universe (Marvel comic)]] (appears to have always been here)
*[[Transformers: The Movie (Marvel Comics)]]


Would it be too much to suggest that we '''pick one and stick with it'''? - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 08:43, 7 September 2009 (EDT)
== Idea for a page? ==
:Oh, not to mention Marvel UK's [[Collected Comics (Marvel)]], nor the characters [[Decepticon medic (Marvel Comics)]] and [[Jose (Marvel Comics)]]. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 08:54, 7 September 2009 (EDT)
::[[Talk:The Transformers (Marvel comic)#(Marvel Comics) vs. (Marvel comic)|The last discussion]] kind of stalled on the question of whether or not to have "Comics"/"comic" at all.  Technically speaking, "(Marvel)" does the job.  Before, I was favoring "(Marvel comic)", but I think now I'm leaning towards just "(Marvel)" because seriously, parentheticals should be as short as possible. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 09:24, 7 September 2009 (EDT)
:::[[Marvel Productions]] - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 10:27, 8 September 2009 (EDT)
::::Considering that Marvel Productions was apparently a child company of Marvel Comics, I don't see that as a problem. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 19:19, 8 September 2009 (EDT)
:::::Marvel Productions (now defunct) relates to the '''cartoon'''. Marvel Comics (obviously) relates to the comics. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 10:25, 9 September 2009 (EDT)
::::::Considering that any Marvel Comics-specific concept or character is either going to have the Comicnav template or some form of "Marvel Comics continuity" on the page... I ''still'' don't see a problem. Anything that comes from the cartoon is going to be just (G1) or say "cartoon continuity" since Sunbow is always the main company known for cartoon stuff. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 17:09, 9 September 2009 (EDT)


:"Rampages"? Really, now. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 20:08, 8 September 2009 (EDT)
Perhaps a page discussing the various Transformers that have "base modes" as a third form, like Powermaster Prime, Motormaster, etc. It's a major recurring gimmick since G1. [[User:DrakeyC|DrakeyC]] ([[User talk:DrakeyC|talk]]) 09:09, 30 January 2026 (EST)
::I hereby dub thee a "Deckchair Rampage"!  Hurrah, we now hast a term by which to call it!  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 22:43, 8 September 2009 (EDT)
:I think a general "[[base mode]]" article would make sense, yeah. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 10:19, 30 January 2026 (EST)
::seconded. frankly shocked to learn there isn't one already --[[User:Arren1234 |Arren Meuchel]] [[User_talk:Arren1234 |(talk)]] 11:58, 30 January 2026 (EST)
:::I 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)


== Talk page "dead link" removal ==
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)


Can I ask what is behind the mass removal of "dead links" on talk pages? Does having "dead links" on talk pages mess something up? I'm just curious. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 16:15, 8 September 2009 (EDT)
==About character name translations==
:Well, for one thing, dead links that are not meant to link pages do somewhat pollute the "Wanted pages" index. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 16:45, 8 September 2009 (EDT)
Um... I'm new here. I have a question, and I'm not sure if this question falls under [[Help:Official info]]...
::Oh. I'm surprised talk page links show up on "wanted pages." - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 16:58, 8 September 2009 (EDT)


== Images for deletion ==
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.


[[User:Interrobang|Interrobang]] has marked a pile of unused images for deletion. Some of them, I suspect, are unused because of the Bookworm crash, like the [[:Image:Lipole swarm destroying shuttle FFOD4.jpg|pictures of Lipoles]].  I've made a start on some of them, but if anyone wants to pitch in and fix up some of the images we should keep, be my guest! --[[User:Abates|abates]] 07:59, 12 September 2009 (EDT)
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?


:True, part of them are, um, "victims"(sort of) of the Bookworm crash, such as [[:Image:Convoy BT.jpg]] and several others. I think those pictures should be hold and got checked/salvage for a while before being deleted. I've check the [[:Category:To be deleted]], but I can only recognize a few. People can check their watch list or Category:To be deleted to help ID those pictures they(users) know where they(pictures) belong to. --'''[[User:TX55|<span style= "color:#00FA9A">TX55</span>]]'''<small><SUP>''[[User talk:TX55|<span style= "color:#0000CD">TALK</span>]]''</SUP></small> 08:26, 12 September 2009 (EDT)
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've noticed that several of them aren't "unused" per se--they're not used as images anywhere, but they're still wikilinked to. For example, [[:Image:Fat guard.JPG]] says "There are no pages that link to this file", but if you check "What links here", you'll see that [[Capture the Cube]] does in fact link to it. So before anyone deletes any images, I suggest checking if anything is wikilinking to them first. --[[User:Apoc|Apoc]] 08:42, 12 September 2009 (EDT)
:I suddenly realized that 塔恩 could be used. The packaging of Blokees does indeed call him 塔恩.
::Yeah, I noticed a while back that the section under the image that lists pages which link to it only includes pages where the image is actually embedded.  Plus some images are used in the site skin or CSS files, like the logos [[User:Derik|Derik]] set up to appear after links to certain sites. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 18:30, 12 September 2009 (EDT)


Are we intending to resurrect the community-nav template?  The images used on it were among those tagged for deletion... --[[User:Abates|abates]] 21:11, 14 September 2009 (EDT)
Also, does the foreign name used in the product titles by the Hasbro official flagship store count?
:I'll take that as a no.  And down to 150 pictures now.  Again, if anyone wants to take a look through [[:Category:To be deleted]] in case anything they recognise where the images are supposed to go, please do! --[[User:Abates|abates]] 08:16, 16 September 2009 (EDT)


== Wikicode problems ==
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)


I've noticed that a "=" (equals sign) in a URL linked as a source in a quote tag results in the entire source section not being displayed in the article. Example:
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.  
{{quote|I told them that I would literally commit suicide if they made an action figure of me. I will kill myself.|Megan Fox, [http://enewsi.com/news.php?itemid=13816 Entertainment News International].}}
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?
I fiddled around with the URL and nailed the source of the problem down to the "=". Is this problem common knowledge?--[[User:Nevermore|Nevermore]] 09:15, 13 September 2009 (EDT)
: Been toying around my userpage.
: Check it out:
: <pre><nowiki>{{factions|former|decepticon}}</nowiki></pre>
: "former" (or whatever you write) is shown.
: <pre><nowiki>{{factions|=former|decepticon}}</nowiki></pre>
: "=" renders the text invisible.


: seems like "=" affects templates.
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.


: hah. funny. -- [[User:Silver|Silvery]] 10:55, 13 September 2009 (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)


: '''EDIT:''' I'm so dumb... "=" is one of parameters used in templates. [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Template] -- [[User:Silver|Silvery]] 11:03, 13 September 2009 (EDT)
== So when are we splitting the Legends World characters off? ==


::Is there any way to solve that problem? "=" appears in quite a few URLs.--[[User:Nevermore|Nevermore]] 11:26, 13 September 2009 (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)
<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)


:::As Silver surmised, it's down to the equals being a template parameter.
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)
:::Your options are:
:::#Escape the "=" as &amp;#61; - [http://enewsi.com/news.php?itemid&#61;13816 Entertainment News International]
:::#Feed it through a URL shortener like TinyURL or bit.ly - [http://tinyurl.com/p36l6q Entertainment News International]
i.e.:
{{quote|I told them that I would literally commit suicide if they made an action figure of me. I will kill myself.|Megan Fox, [http://enewsi.com/news.php?itemid&#61;13816 Entertainment News International].}}
:::- [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 11:36, 13 September 2009 (EDT)
::::Just add a "2=" to the code: <nowiki>{{quote|Blahblah|2=Megan Fox, [http://enewsi.com/news.php?itemid=13816 Entertainment News International].}}</nowiki>
{{quote|Blahblah|2=Megan Fox, [http://enewsi.com/news.php?itemid=13816 Entertainment News International].}}
::::[[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 14:37, 13 September 2009 (EDT)


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


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




Weird. --[[User:-Blackout-|-Blackout-]] 09:43, 13 September 2009 (EDT)
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:
:I'm pretty shore it's not supposed to be created, just like the things that don't exist category. [[User:Dead Metal|Dead Metal]] 06:38, 16 September 2009 (EDT)
::The Things that don't exist doesn't automatically delete itself. --[[User:-Blackout-|-Blackout-]] 07:19, 16 September 2009 (EDT)
:::I know but those two categories are not to be created it's part of the joke. [[User:Dead Metal|Dead Metal]] 14:29, 16 September 2009 (EDT)


== Sourcing statements ==
{{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've recently dealt with a bunch of articles where statements were either entirely unsourced, or just broadly attributed to a source without more specific details (such as, just naming a magazine without stating the volume, issue number, date, page number etc., or not linking the online article/interview). I've spent quite some time tracking down the sources and then fixed the statements to better reflect ''what is actually said in those sources''. Basically, someone read a magazine interview and then added some trivia bits from memory, that kind of thing.
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)
: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)
::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)
:::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)
::::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)
:::::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)


Should we have a more rigid mandate that statements should credit sources? I'm not talking Wikipedia-esque anal-retentive "author name, title of article, date of publication, date of accessing" details and sources for general knowledge stuff such as "Devastator has a Supreme Class toy in the ROTF toyline". But anything that is definitely based on a single source should better be followed by a footnote. Especially since a lot of these unsourced statements eventually turn out to be urban myths.
== Out of date MediaWiki ==


Should we make this a mandate, and if yes, how should we enforce it?--[[User:Nevermore|Nevermore]] 14:25, 13 September 2009 (EDT)
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.
:It [[Help:Citing sources|already is a mandate]], [[Help:Style guide#Cite sources|technically speaking]]. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 14:34, 13 September 2009 (EDT)
::That's more of a style guide rather than an actual rule, though. My thought is something similar to what (at least the German version of) Wikipedia does: When you click "submit", you're shown a warning that asks you to make sure you have sourced your statements. It's not too obtrusive (clicking "submit" a second time will submit your text anyway), but it does drive home the point.--[[User:Nevermore|Nevermore]] 15:19, 13 September 2009 (EDT)
:::Our style guides ''are'' rules, pretty much. And that one at least is definitely a specific policy. If we had to mandate every single rule we had before every edit, the Submit screen would have a sea of text. The best we can do is try to encourage newbies to actually read our Help and Policy pages. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 15:26, 13 September 2009 (EDT)


== This Day in Transformers History ==
(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}}
We should try to turn the This Day in Transformers History into an exportable module, like our Go-Boxes. It'll help our SEO by encouraging links back to us as well as give us another source of dynamically-generated deep links to help users discover our content. We have info for all 366 days, we should exploit it. --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] 15:46, 16 September 2009 (EDT)
:Speaking of history, today is the 25th anniversary of the premiere of the G1 cartoon right? Want to mention that anywhere? --[[User:SuzyP|SuzyP]] 18:35, 17 September 2009 (EDT)


== Boxes gone from disambig templates? ==
== irc needed ==


I noticed the disambiguation templates don't seem to have those gray boxes behind them anymore. Is this intentional? Because it's confusing. -[[User:Mazenoise|Mazenoise]] 08:16, 17 September 2009 (EDT)
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)
:Derik shifted the CSS styling into the stylesheet. Your browser probably had the old stylesheet cached, but a shift-reload should fix it. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 08:20, 17 September 2009 (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)
::Yeah, it did actually. Thanks! -[[User:Mazenoise|Mazenoise]] 08:29, 17 September 2009 (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)


And they (well, the ones Derik hit anyway) sprouted a thick grey left border in the transition because...? - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 11:34, 17 September 2009 (EDT)
== When does controversy surrounding a figure prove worthy enough to mention? ==
:I forget the reason.  Rest assured that it did make sense though!
:Main advantage of switching the disambig boxes to CSS: When you have multiple in a row, they stack prettier without a double-outline between them. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 19:47, 17 September 2009 (EDT)
:::''I forget the reason.  Rest assured that it did make sense though!''
::If that's not a Derikism, it deserves to be. (And is the main reason why I'm scared of changing to external CSS rather than inline CSS - you having the keys to the styles virtually unfettered, since those admins who could either override or yank the emopanda CSS mostly either don't know how or are absent much of the time)
::So now we have disambig templates that are unique amongst messageboxen in a particularly... nondescript way. Different enough to be irritating, not different enough to serve any real purpose. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 21:09, 17 September 2009 (EDT)
:::Eh? Oh, I thought I changed it back.  (I remembered why they had a border on the left... I was testing something and decided it didn't work, I didn't realize it was still on.)
:::In theory Scout was going to make some changes last week to move us out of the existing CSS situation with much less living in my dev file... but she seems to have forgotten... -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 21:24, 17 September 2009 (EDT)
::::What was she planning to do?  I can have a crack at it. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 21:29, 17 September 2009 (EDT)
:::::Move a bunch of stuff to [[MediaWiki:common.css]], I expect.
:::::(Note the difference between Common.css [all skins, including the ones no-one uses like Simple and MySkin], Monacobook.css [Monacobook only] and Monobook.css [Monobook only]. Scout [[User_talk:Suki_Brits#.22Fixed.22_Monobook|forgot about Monobook]] the last time common.css was edited. Incidentally, where did she ultimately put those changes? They ain't in the empty Monacobook.css.) - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 21:44, 17 September 2009 (EDT)
::::::I have a suspicion that the plan may be to create a new user class with rights to edit css files here (in which case I don't have the necessary access rights to do so)... --[[User:Abates|abates]] 21:59, 17 September 2009 (EDT)
:::::::That was the one.  :)  Either she forgot, or she tried and it didn't work.  I'll bug her when I remember.  (It's not like it's pressing... it's been needing doing for some time so it can wait a bit longer.)  -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 22:33, 17 September 2009 (EDT)
::::::And to answer the css question, the changes are in [http://tfwiki.net/w2/skins/monacobook/tt1.css this file] which isn't editable through the Mediawiki interface. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 00:03, 18 September 2009 (EDT)
:::::::"Scout, I have 3 requests."
:::::::"No, no, yes if I don't have to do any work."
:::::::-[[User:Derik|Derik]] 01:51, 18 September 2009 (EDT)


== Guess what..... ==
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)


I've just decided to check our statistics for no apparent reason, and we have 9,588 "legitimate content pages", whatever that means. So then I randomly decided to check out the Wikia page (which, by the way, has had the same Featured Article for God-knows-how-long), and guess what?
== Toy entry idea: links to Hasbro Pulse and TakaraTomy Mall entries for modern new releases ==


7,209 pages. We're beating them out by 2,349 pages, which is quite a lot. Who thinks we can hit 10,000 soon? --[[User:-Blackout-|-Blackout-]] 15:15, 18 September 2009 (EDT)
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)
:No problem. ...though it's about quality, not quantity. ;) -- [[User:Silver|Silvery]] 15:24, 18 September 2009 (EDT)
: I can get behind this, I'm usually first to add those individual websites from Takara Tomy when available, if that's a new mandate I can help. [[User:MahXyme|MahXyme/MahXymal]] ([[User talk:MahXyme|talk]]) 16:56, 9 May 2026 (EDT)
::I can tell you the quality of their articles as well.
::Nonexistent. --[[User:-Blackout-|-Blackout-]] 15:29, 18 September 2009 (EDT)
:::Oh, you're too harsh. Anyways, I know this wiki's the best 'cause I checked all TF wikis before I've decided to join... -- [[User:Silver|Silvery]] 15:45, 18 September 2009 (EDT)
:::I can personally testify, we ''delete'' articles that aren't up to snuff and don't look like they're going to be.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 15:36, 18 September 2009 (EDT)
:Now I'm interest in knowing how many articles the original wiki had back before the big split. - [[User:Cattleprod|Cattleprod]] 15:57, 18 September 2009 (EDT)
::Somewhere around [[Transformers_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal/Arriving#A_spirit_of_healthy_competition|6890 or so]].  I should note that our current total is artificially inflated by about 75 due to the "ghost" pages causing the macron issue, so our total's nearer 9513 or so. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 20:36, 18 September 2009 (EDT)
:::@Silvery: I'm not being that harsh. Here's some examples. And I know, this will give them slightly more traffic.
:::[http://transformers.wikia.com/wiki/Soundwave_(Movie) Their ROTF Soundwave page.]
:::[http://transformers.wikia.com/wiki/All_Hail_Megatron Their All Hail Megatron page. Count the red links.] --[[User:-Blackout-|-Blackout-]] 02:53, 19 September 2009 (EDT)
::::You're too harsh in a "hit 'em when they're down" sense. It's called "irony". :P -- [[User:Silver|Silvery]] 04:11, 19 September 2009 (EDT)


== Reading Order ==


When the wiki began in 2006, reading order was a clear and obvious thingIt was straight publication order-- and even if broken up into minis like Dreamwave did, they followwed a logical "volume" order.
== "Canceled media" template==
With the recent creation of the "Canceled video games" category, I can't help but wonder: in the same way that we have a little template for canceled toys, shouldn't we also have one to add to the top of the page of media that was canceled and never saw an official release? Seems like it could come in handy! ([[User:FortressMaxxing|FortressMaxxing]] ([[User talk:FortressMaxxing|talk]]) 12:30, 12 May 2026 (EDT))
:I'm in 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)


...IDW is nowwhere near that clean.  Characters literally leave one aeries, appear in another, bunches of stories are interwoven.  I think we should consider creating an IDW "reading order" page, simply because reading order is not the same as publication order, is not the same as chronological order. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 04:41, 19 September 2009 (EDT)
== Digging into the Beast Machines/Transtech Era ==
Just throwing a note in here that I'm getting in contact with some folks who were on the Transformers team during the Beast Machines/Transtech era, so I'll be adding notes, fleshing out some things, and adding design credits where I can. Like with the G2 ad creators, I'll post up the full emails on the relevant discussion pages as I get permission. [[User:MCRG|MCRG]] ([[User talk:MCRG|talk]]) 13:04, 12 May 2026 (EDT)
:Nice, I'm excited to see where this goes! ([[User:FortressMaxxing|FortressMaxxing]] ([[User talk:FortressMaxxing|talk]]) 15:32, 12 May 2026 (EDT))

Latest revision as of 02:04, 13 May 2026


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

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

Specific Discussion Subjects
Moving From Wikia:

New Ad Policy:

Bookworm Database-Crash:

Server Move:

Relicensing:

Dealing With Vandalism:

GoBots Sister Wiki:

Wiki Technical Information:


MediaWiki talk:Community Portal/Archive


Binder of Revelation Illustration Credits

[edit]

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

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

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

[edit]

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

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

Size of the page again

[edit]

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

Idea for a page?

[edit]

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

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

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

About character name translations

[edit]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

So when are we splitting the Legends World characters off?

[edit]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

Out of date MediaWiki

[edit]

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

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

irc needed

[edit]

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

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

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

[edit]

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

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

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

[edit]

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

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


"Canceled media" template

[edit]

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

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

Digging into the Beast Machines/Transtech Era

[edit]

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

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