Talk:Caliburn (Armada): Difference between revisions
From MediaWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Crossblades (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
::Yes, exactly. Using the character in a new continuity isn't the same thing as repurposing. (Except maybe Shattered Glass. Case-by-case there I guess.) Repurposing seems like a very specific thing... an old toy becomes a new, different character. Using an old toy in a new place isn't that. It's maybe something. Continuity-reuse perhaps. Or maybe there's a better term. Probably there is. But that's not what repurposing is. At least, it shouldn't be. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 23:47, 13 September 2015 (EDT) | ::Yes, exactly. Using the character in a new continuity isn't the same thing as repurposing. (Except maybe Shattered Glass. Case-by-case there I guess.) Repurposing seems like a very specific thing... an old toy becomes a new, different character. Using an old toy in a new place isn't that. It's maybe something. Continuity-reuse perhaps. Or maybe there's a better term. Probably there is. But that's not what repurposing is. At least, it shouldn't be. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 23:47, 13 September 2015 (EDT) | ||
:::Unless said character is a dimension hopper, anytime you place a character from one continuity to another is a repurpose. Some examples are G1 Lockdown repurposed from ROTF Lockdown, G1 Bulkhead repurposed from Prime Bulkhead, RID Hound repurposed from G1 Hound, etc. It doesn't always have to be a brand new character. ([[User:Crossblades|Crossblades]]) ([[User talk:Crossblades|talk]]) 21:10, 14 September 2015 (EDT) | :::Unless said character is a dimension hopper, anytime you place a character from one continuity to another is a repurpose. Some examples are G1 Lockdown repurposed from ROTF Lockdown, G1 Bulkhead repurposed from Prime Bulkhead, RID Hound repurposed from G1 Hound, etc. It doesn't always have to be a brand new character. ([[User:Crossblades|Crossblades]]) ([[User talk:Crossblades|talk]]) 21:10, 14 September 2015 (EDT) | ||
::::So you've asserted. But you haven't given any reason why that assertion should be true. And it's an assertion I reject and disagree with. Let us not forget that the idea of continuity families is a construct created for wiki organization, one that the fiction has shown is arbitrary and subject to blurred lines and drift Basically, you haven't given an argument, you've just stated "I think this is what repurpose means." --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 21:32, 14 September 2015 (EDT) | |||
Revision as of 01:32, 15 September 2015
Am I losing my mind? How can Caliburn be repurposed as Caliburn? I've read the Repurposing page and it makes a lot of sense. Using a blue Transmetal Rattrap as Transmetal Packrat, sure, or taking Slice and calling him Shattered Glass Wheeljack. But trying to claim that Caliburn the minion of Megazarak is a repurpose of Caliburn the minion of Megazarak seems completely asinine to me. Am I wrong? I thought the wiki was trying to stop falling all over itself to pat itself on the back about how clever it is by obfuscating the truth with some technical definition. I dunno. Someone else weigh in here. Can Caliburn be repurposed as Caliburn just because one guy is in a Unicron Trilogy-verse and another is in a RID-verse? --Giggidy (talk) 23:33, 13 September 2015 (EDT)
- Consider Beast Wars: Uprising Steamhammer, Thunderblast, and Tankor. S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47 (talk) 23:41, 13 September 2015 (EDT)
- Yes, exactly. Using the character in a new continuity isn't the same thing as repurposing. (Except maybe Shattered Glass. Case-by-case there I guess.) Repurposing seems like a very specific thing... an old toy becomes a new, different character. Using an old toy in a new place isn't that. It's maybe something. Continuity-reuse perhaps. Or maybe there's a better term. Probably there is. But that's not what repurposing is. At least, it shouldn't be. --Giggidy (talk) 23:47, 13 September 2015 (EDT)
- Unless said character is a dimension hopper, anytime you place a character from one continuity to another is a repurpose. Some examples are G1 Lockdown repurposed from ROTF Lockdown, G1 Bulkhead repurposed from Prime Bulkhead, RID Hound repurposed from G1 Hound, etc. It doesn't always have to be a brand new character. (Crossblades) (talk) 21:10, 14 September 2015 (EDT)
- So you've asserted. But you haven't given any reason why that assertion should be true. And it's an assertion I reject and disagree with. Let us not forget that the idea of continuity families is a construct created for wiki organization, one that the fiction has shown is arbitrary and subject to blurred lines and drift Basically, you haven't given an argument, you've just stated "I think this is what repurpose means." --Giggidy (talk) 21:32, 14 September 2015 (EDT)
- Unless said character is a dimension hopper, anytime you place a character from one continuity to another is a repurpose. Some examples are G1 Lockdown repurposed from ROTF Lockdown, G1 Bulkhead repurposed from Prime Bulkhead, RID Hound repurposed from G1 Hound, etc. It doesn't always have to be a brand new character. (Crossblades) (talk) 21:10, 14 September 2015 (EDT)
- Yes, exactly. Using the character in a new continuity isn't the same thing as repurposing. (Except maybe Shattered Glass. Case-by-case there I guess.) Repurposing seems like a very specific thing... an old toy becomes a new, different character. Using an old toy in a new place isn't that. It's maybe something. Continuity-reuse perhaps. Or maybe there's a better term. Probably there is. But that's not what repurposing is. At least, it shouldn't be. --Giggidy (talk) 23:47, 13 September 2015 (EDT)
